New Delhi: Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani of the Delhi high court on Thursday recused himself from hearing a group of petitions challenging the Centre’s new IT rules filed by The Wire, The Quint and others. The petitioners had said that the Information Technology (Guidelines For Intermediaries And Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 go against the IT Act, which they were framed under, as well as the Constitution.
Justice Bhambhani was heading the vacation bench hearing the case. The Wire and others had filed an urgent plea in the case seeking a stay on application of the IT rules, as the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting had said in a letter on June 18, 2021 that the publications must comply within five days or face penalties.
The ministry has claimed that since the high court had not stayed the rules while hearing the writ petition, compliance was still necessary. However, the Delhi high court had made it clear earlier that if any coercive action is taken against the petitioners under the IT Rules, they may seek an urgent hearing from the court.
Senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, appearing for the petitioners before the Delhi high court on Monday, asked the court to provide interim relief from coercive action against the media houses that have not complied with Part 3 of the IT Rules while the legal challenge is being heard. Justice Bhambhani, however, said this was not possible as he could either hear the matter or not, and there is “no middle way”, LiveLaw reported.
The matter is now expected to be heard on June 28.
Before moving the high court seeking an urgent stay, The Wire had written to the government several times urging it not to insist on compliance while the matter is sub judice.
“It is submitted that in the event that the Impugned Notice dt. 18.06.2021 is not stayed and there is no restraint on further coercive steps, grave prejudice would be caused to the Petitioner Applicants inasmuch as they would be liable to penalty under Section 44 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 as well as other consequences. On the other hand, no prejudice whatsoever is caused to the Respondent Government if the Petitioner does not comply with the Rules – and in particular Rule 18 – inasmuch as the information requested is already in public domain, as has been stated in the communications above. Furthermore, the same would only be the extension of the status quo as on date,” The Wire and others have said in their urgent petition.
After Justice Bhambhani’s decision to recuse himself from the case without staying the rules, The Wire‘s founding editor Siddharth Varadarajan wrote to Kshitij Aggarwal, assistant director in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. “In view of this unforeseen delay in the hearing, it would be appropriate for you to hold your hand and not insist on compliance with your notices until the matter comes up for hearing before the Hon’ble Court,” Varadarajan said.
Several digital media publications and editors – including The Wire, The News Minute‘s Dhanya Rajendran, The Wire‘s M.K. Venu, The Quint and Livelaw – have legally challenged the Centre’s decision to extend the IT Rules to digital media publications. You can read more about why The Wire wants these rules struck down here.