Thread by @fpjindia

#BombayHighCourt bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Girish Kulkarni to hear petitions challenging #NewITRules. The pleas filed by @TheLeaflet_in & @waglenikhil claim the new rules are an assault on free speech.

Yesterday, the judges heard senior counsel Darius Khambatta for #Leaflet and adv Abhay Nevagi for #NikhilWagle

Now ASG Anil Singh will argue for Union govt.

#BombayHighCourt

ASG: Before getting into the merits of the case, I would like to point out that multiple petitions were filed against the Union govt seeking regulation of online platforms. Some pleas were before the #DelhiHighCourt however an SLP was filed in #SupremeCourt

ASG: #SupremeCourt stayed the proceedings before all the High Courts. This was prior to the new rules.
Now after the new rules, there are 14 petitions filed in Delhi, Orissa, Madras, Kerala and Calcutta high courts seeking same relief. Only Kerala HC has stayed the new rules

ASG now refers to orders passed by the division bench of #MadrasHighCourt which didn't stayed the #NewITRules

CJ: Has the Union filed any counter before the #MadrasHC?

ASG: We will file within two or three days. Notice has been issued.

#BombayHighCourt

ASG: Also, because our petition seeking transfer of all these 14 matters (to the Supreme Court) is pending before the SC, we are yet to file our response before #MadrasHC

CJ seeks a copy of the order of the #KeralaHC staying the new IT rules.

Khambatta: Even the #CalcuttaHighCourt had ordered the Union govt to file affidavit-in-reply, way back in June. Yet they haven't filed one.

First order of #KeralaHC was on March 10 and the second in July staying the new IT rules.

CJ: Any reasons given (to stay)

Khambatta: No, Milords, no reasons attributed as such.

CJ: The March 10 order is passed on a plea filed by a legal news publisher. The July order is on pleas by an association of publishers.

CJ: Mr Khambatta, if we accept your argument today...

CJ: ...and you post material in the interregnum and later your petitions fail, will you use our order seeking protection later? Can we have a workable solution, i.e. if you publish anything that isn't protected under the new rules, the Union govt can point out to us?

Khambatta: Your Lordships mean, that the new rules are stayed along with this caveat, we are open to it. We are open to face consequences if we publish anything that is fundamentally not allowed.

#BombayHighCourt

ASG: I would submit, let there be a final hearing directly instead of passing interim orders. Also, we are about to file our affidavit in the SC.

CJ: Mr ASG you haven't filed affidavits before any High Court despite orders. Why to wait more?

ASG: Most digital platforms have complied with the new IT rules. We have to file a common affidavit thus it is taking time because there are over 14 petitions in different High Courts. Please consider not to stay the #NewITRules

#BombayHighCourt
#NikhilWagle

J Kulkarni: Okay then Mr Singh, file a reply before us too. By when would it be possible?

ASG: I will try to file it by Monday but do grant me three days more.

J Kulkarni: We will give you time but till then don't take any coervice action.

#BombayHighCourt

ASG: No. There isn't any averment in these petitions before Milords that coercive action not be taken.

J Kulkarni: It would be problematic then.

CJ: The sword of action is always hanging on their head. Why let them work under fear.
#BombayHighCourt

Khambatta: But an affidavit was ordered in June. The affidavit should have been ready by now. Our anxiety is the chilling effect of these rules on #FreeSpeech.

ASG: There is no chilling effect as such. If any action is taken they can come back to your Lordships.

CJ: Do one thing, file your response by Thursday and we will take it up on Friday morning next week. File a short response as to why the rules shouldn't be stayed. We can have a detailed affidavit at the time of final hearing.

Ordered accordingly.