[Attachment(s) from Amitabh Thakur included below]
Friends,
As stated earlier by me, I and wife Nutan had filed a Writ Petition in the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench challenging the validity of section 66A of the Information Technology Act 2000. Today the Hon'ble asked the Union of India to present its reply within one week in this Writ petition No 9766/2012 (M/B. The bench of Hon'ble Justice Uma Nath Singh and Hon'ble Justice Satish Chandra asked the Counsel for the Central Government counsel Sri Alok Mathur to seek instructions from the Union government and present its reply in the next hearing on 11 December 2012.
Today Sri Asok Pande, our counsel argued this section to be quashed as being too broad and vague so as to be misused and abused by powerful and influential people and being against Fundamental Right to expression under Article 19(1)(a) and other rights related with life and liberty.
Today Sri Asok Pande, our counsel argued this section to be quashed as being too broad and vague so as to be misused and abused by powerful and influential people and being against Fundamental Right to expression under Article 19(1)(a) and other rights related with life and liberty.
We have cited examples of Ms Shaheen Dadha arrest in Late Bal Thackeray Facebook post, Sri Ravi Srinivasan arrest for tweet against Sri P. Chidambaram's son and a Kolkata professor, Sri Ambikesh Mahapatra, arrest for anti Ms Mamata-Banerjee cartoons to say that section 66A IT Act prima-facie seems to be vague, wide, all-pervasive, confusing, lax, incongruent, slack and ambiguous as having the potential of being misused and abused.
We consider this a good news for the cause of right to freedom of expression
Amitabh Thakur
Lucknow
# 94155-34526
Lucknow
# 94155-34526
__._,_.___
Attachment(s) from Amitabh Thakur
1 of 1 File(s)
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (1) |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment