*Shreya Singhal v Union of India* (2015)
Reading Down Intermediary Liability
The Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal v Union of India (2015) struck down Section 66A of the IT Act as unconstitutional and separately read down Section 79(3)(b), holding that an intermediary's "actual knowledge" of unlawful content must come through a court order or a notification from the appropriate government agency — not through private complaints — before an obligation to take down content arises.
- Decided March 24, 2015; a landmark free-speech and intermediary-liability judgment
- The Court reasoned that requiring intermediaries to adjudicate the legality of every private complaint would be unworkable given the volume of content and would incentivise over-removal
- This judgment remains the operative standard for what triggers loss of safe harbour under Section 79(3)(b)
- It did not address recommendation/curation systems, which is the newer legal question now under government examination
● Tracked since February 08, 2026 · last seen August 08, 2026 · updates as the daily brief publishes
Polity & Governance
Article 19(1)(a) and Reasonable Restrictions
Polity & Governance
Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000
Polity & Governance
Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000
Polity & Governance
IT Rules, 2021
Polity & Governance
IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021
See it in today’s brief.
Daily current affairs with every static concept explained in place.
Read the daily brief