Challenge High Court's Order, Then We'll See: Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Petition Seeking Ban On WhatsApp
|The Supreme Court today refused to entertain a petition seeking directions to the Union Government to impose a ban on the operations of the WhatsApp messaging service alleging violation of Information Technology Rules.
The Petitioner before the Court had previously filed a Writ Petition before the Kerala High Court in June 2021 seeking similar relief. A Division Bench of the Court dismissed the petition stating that it was "too premature to issue a mandamus" and that the Petitioner had failed to make out any case of arbitrariness or illegality on the part of the messaging service.
In a hearing that only went on for a brief while, a two-Judge Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Aravind Kumar told the Petitioner, "You challenge that Order. We'll see," referring to the High Court's Judgment.
The Court, therefore, refused to hear the fresh Public Interest Litigation petition filed by one Omanakuttam K.G., who is a software engineer.
He had moved the Kerala High Court in 2021 arguing that WhatsApp was not complying with the provisions of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethic Code) Rules, 2021.
The Petitioner stated that WhatsApp is not free from manipulations and lacks security and a message received in the form of media can easily be manipulated even by any common man. A receiver can change the media received by him and such manipulation could easily cause unrest or panic among the general public and could be used against an individual, the Court recorded his submission. He also stated that since the services of the application are end-to-end encrypted, the activities of its users is not possible to be traced.
Perusing the provisions of the 2021 Rules, the High Court observed that they take care of "every situation" required to be taken care of with regard to regulating and controlling the mechanism on information and technology.
The Court said, "Without producing any supporting materials to substantiate the claim, the petitioner has made vague statements, alleging that Government is not doing anything to control and regulate the platform in question. However, the rules made by the Government prove the fact that the Union Government have taken stock of the situations, and accordingly, adequate provisions are made in the rules, to streamline all the aspects, to protect the interests of the nation and laws."
On the Petitioner's prayer seeking a direction to investigating agencies to not rely on the contents of WhatsApp messages, the Court said it "cannot issue such a direction", adding that "it is for the investigating agencies to decide as to how to go about a case and what are all the material evidence required for successful culmination of a prosecution." The Court concluded that any omnibus direction would interfere with the statutory framework by which the criminal justice system functions.
The Court had "no hesitation" to arrive at the conclusion that the petitioner had failed to make out any case of arbitrariness or illegality on the part of the Respondents, that could justify interference. The Court, therefore, refused to exercise its powers of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Cause Title: Omanakuttan K.G. v. WhatsApp Applications Services Pvt. Ltd. [W.P.(C) No. 736/2024 PIL-W]