The Centre's fact-checking unit aimed to remove "fake" information from social media, creating a legal obligation for platforms to comply.
The Bombay High Court struck down the rule, deeming it unconstitutional for violating freedom of expression.
The terms "fake," "false," and "misleading" were not clearly defined, leading to potential misuse and arbitrary censorship.
The rule could compel political satirists and others to self-censor for fear of penalties.
No recourse was provided for platforms or individuals wrongly labeled by the fact-checking unit.
The restriction applied specifically to information about the Centre, raising concerns about bias.
Article 19(2): The ruling emphasized that truth-based restrictions on speech are not justified under constitutional provisions for free expression.
Critics warned the rule could suppress legitimate discourse, while supporters argued it aimed to combat misinformation.
COMMENTS