IndiaWhat is the IT Act section 66A controversy?
Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000 criminalised sending 'offensive' or 'menacing' electronic messages but was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015 as unconstitutional and violative of free speech.
What the Law Says
Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 empowered authorities to punish individuals for sending electronic messages deemed 'offensive', 'menacing', or causing 'annoyance' — vague terms that led to widespread misuse.
Section 66A imposed punishment of up to three years imprisonment and fine for sending information via a computer resource or communication device that was 'grossly offensive', 'menacing', or known to be false and intended to cause 'annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will'.
The provision lacked precise definitions for subjective terms like 'offensive' or 'annoyance', making it prone to arbitrary enforcement and chilling effects on free expression online.
It applied broadly to SMS, emails, social media posts, and any electronic communication — regardless of intent, harm, or context.
Statutory TextAny person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device, any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; or any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will, persistently makes available to a computer resource, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.
— Information Technology Act, 2000, s. 66A — Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc.
What Courts Have Said
The Supreme Court unanimously declared Section 66A unconstitutional, holding it violated the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
The Court held Section 66A was unconstitutionally vague, overbroad, and not saved by reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2); it struck down the provision in its entirety.
What to Do
If charged under Section 66A before 2015: File for quashing of proceedings — the provision no longer exists.
If facing similar charges under other laws (e.g., IPC Sections 504, 505, or IT Act s. 66D/67): Consult a lawyer to assess constitutionality and factual defences.
Report misuse of vague provisions to digital rights organisations or file RTI queries on enforcement data.
Cite Shreya Singhal (2015) 5 SCC 1 to challenge any revived or analogous restrictive orders.
Sources
Not legal advice. This article is general information based on publicly available sources, written for educational purposes. Laws change and individual situations vary. Consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before acting on anything you read here. Last reviewed: 2026-06-08.