The Jantar Mantar PIL Withdrawn matter has concluded before the Delhi High Court. The Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw a PIL challenging temporary internet shutdowns around the Jantar Mantar protest site.
A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela heard the petition. The Bench noted that the government had restored telecom services in the affected area.
Petition Became Infructuous
The case arose from temporary orders suspending mobile internet and broadband services near Jantar Mantar, New Delhi.
Authorities had imposed the restrictions during student protests linked to the NEET-UG paper leak controversy.
However, the restrictions had a limited duration. The orders expired, and authorities restored internet connectivity.
Therefore, the Court found that no live issue remained for adjudication.
The Bench observed that the temporary telecom suspension orders had lapsed. Since connectivity had returned, the petition no longer required further consideration.
The Court consequently allowed the petitioner to withdraw the PIL.
Challenge to Internet Shutdown Orders
The petition was filed by the digital rights organisation Software Freedom Law Centre, India (SFLC.in).
The organisation argued that localized internet shutdowns during peaceful protests violated fundamental rights.
It relied on Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The provision protects freedom of speech and expression.
The petitioner also argued that the authorities had failed to follow the safeguards laid down in Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India.
Advocate Vrinda Bhandari appeared for the petitioner.
She argued that authorities must publish suspension orders in the public domain. She also stressed the need for proportional and time-bound restrictions.
Government’s Position
The government defended the temporary restrictions.
It argued that authorities had imposed the measures to manage public safety risks during protests.
The restrictions covered only specific areas. They also operated for a limited period.
The government further maintained that authorities had followed the applicable 2017 Telecom Suspension Rules.
After the government confirmed that it had fully restored telecom services, the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the PIL.
Key Issues Before the Court
| Issue | Petitioner’s Contention | Government’s Position | Court’s Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proportionality | Broad shutdowns can restrict peaceful assembly and emergency communication. | Localized restrictions addressed public safety concerns. | The issue became infructuous after the orders expired. |
| Publication of Orders | Authorities allegedly failed to publish suspension orders as required. | Authorities followed the statutory telecom rules. | The Court made no formal finding on the issue. |
| Duration | The restrictions allegedly lacked sufficient transparency. | The orders had clear time limits. | The Court recorded that the restrictions had lapsed. |
Background of the Jantar Mantar Restrictions
Authorities imposed the temporary telecom restrictions in parts of Central Delhi.
The measures followed heightened tensions during student marches and public demonstrations.
Law enforcement authorities argued that the restrictions could help prevent rumours and maintain public order near sensitive areas.
However, the government later confirmed that it had restored mobile data and network access.
No active restriction remained when the Court considered the petition.
Delhi High Court Allows Withdrawal
The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner to withdraw the PIL.
The Court noted that the temporary suspension orders had expired. It also noted that internet connectivity had returned to the affected area.
Consequently, the Court found no surviving issue that required adjudication.
The Jantar Mantar PIL Withdrawn proceedings therefore ended without a ruling on the broader constitutional challenge to the internet shutdown orders.
The petitioner received liberty to pursue appropriate remedies where applicable.
