Create a custom practice set
Pick category, difficulty, number of questions, and time limit. Start instantly with your own quiz.
Generate QuizGK Question
In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court applied the proportionality test to internet shutdowns. Which of the following was NOT a requirement imposed by the Court for imposing internet restrictions?
- Publication of shutdown orders for transparency
- Time-bound restrictions subject to periodic review
- Judicial review of shutdown decisions
- Complete prohibition of internet shutdowns under any circumstances
Answer: Complete prohibition of internet shutdowns under any circumstances
Anuradha Bhasin (2020) digital rights and proportionality: (a) Context: Challenge to internet shutdowns in Jammu & Kashmir following Article 370 abrogation, (b) Supreme Court holding: (i) Freedom of speech (Article 19(1)(a)) and profession (Article 19(1)(g)) extend to internet medium, (ii) Internet shutdown orders must be published for transparency and judicial review, (iii) Restrictions must satisfy proportionality test: legitimate aim, rational connection, least restrictive alternative, balancing of interests, (c) Requirements imposed: (i) Publication: Shutdown orders must be published to enable judicial review, public scrutiny, (ii) Time-bound: Restrictions must be temporary, subject to periodic review, not indefinite, (iii) Judicial review: Courts can examine whether shutdowns satisfy proportionality test, (d) NOT requirement: Complete prohibition of internet shutdowns — Court recognized legitimate state interests (national security, public order) may justify restrictions if proportionate, (e) Applications: (i) J&K shutdown case: Court directed publication of orders, periodic review, time-bound restrictions, (ii) DPDP Act, 2023: Data protection framework balancing privacy with legitimate state/business needs, (iii) Algorithmic accountability: Emerging jurisprudence on AI bias, transparency in automated decision-making, (f) Illustrates adaptive constitutionalism: Applying enduring values (free speech, privacy) to emerging technological contexts through calibrated judicial review.