PIL in Delhi HC challenges mobile internet suspension near Jantar Mantar protest

Software Freedom Law Center India moved the Delhi High Court challenging repeated mobile internet suspension orders around Jantar Mantar, calling them unconstitutional and disproportionate. The PIL seeks to quash the orders and demands greater transparency in future internet shutdown decisions

New Delhi: Legal services organisation Software Freedom Law Center, India on Friday moved the Delhi High Court against the suspension of mobile internet services in parts of Central Delhi amid the ongoing CJP-led protest at Jantar Mantar against NEET paper leak and alleged examination irregularities.

The counsel for the petitioner mentioned the PIL for urgent hearing before a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia, which agreed to list it on Friday.

---

“This is a PIL against internet shutdown at Jantar Mantar,” the lawyer said, urging the bench to take up the matter at 2.30 pm. The PIL, however, could not be listed during the court hours due to certain defects.

The Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) has been protesting in the heart of Delhi since June 20, demanding the resignation of Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan over the NEET paper leak.

Software Freedom Law Center, India (SFLC.In), in its petition, sought quashing and setting aside of orders issued by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs on July 17, 20, 22 and 23 to shut down mobile internet services in parts of central Delhi.

The petition said temporary suspension of telecommunication services, including mobile internet services, was “one of the most extraordinary coercive powers conferred upon the Executive” as it interferes with the exercise of freedoms guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a) (free speech), 19(1)(b) (peaceful assembly), 19(1)(g) (right to practice any trade or profession) and 21 (right to life and liberty) of the Constitution.

Terming the suspension orders “illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional”, the petitioner said they neither disclose any public emergency nor provide the reasons to demonstrate why a blanket suspension of mobile internet services was necessary or proportionate to any alleged threat.

The plea underscored that the authorities invoked Section 20(2)(b) of the Telecom Act read with the Suspension Rules, 2024 to record that suspension was necessary “in the interest of public safety and averting public emergency” but failed to consider “less restrictive alternatives” before imposing a blanket suspension of mobile internet services.

It further alleged that the suspension orders do not disclose an “apparent independent application of mind” and “reflect a mechanical exercise of statutory power inconsistent with the requirements of administrative law”.

“The present challenge arises from the Impugned Orders issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs directing suspension of all mobile internet technologies within a radius of approximately 1.5 kilometres from Jantar Mantar, New Delhi,” the plea said.

“The repeated issuance of six separate suspension orders over a span of seven days further underscores the necessity of examining whether each exercise of statutory power was independently undertaken in accordance with Section 20(2)(b),” it added.

The PIL, which raised concerns over transparency surrounding the suspension orders, sought a direction to ensure that every future suspension order is contemporaneously published through an official and publicly accessible website together with the date and time of publication.

It also sought a direction to the authorities to produce the complete original records relating to the suspension orders, including the files placed before the competent authority, intelligence reports, any assessments and recommendations relied upon, statutory approvals granted under the Telecommunications Act as well as the decision of the review committee.