 bill no 57 of  2015 the information technology (amendment) bill, 2015 byshri jagdambika pal, mp a billfurther to amend the information technology act, 2000be it enacted by parliament in the sixty-sixth year of the republic of india as follows:—2 in the information technology act, 2000, in section 66a,—amendment of section 66a21 of 2000(i) clause (a) shall be omitted; (ii) in clause (b), the words ''annoyance, inconvenience,'' shall be omitted; (iii) in clause (c), the words ''for the purpose of causing annoyance or inconvenience or'' shall be omitted; and5(iv) after clause (c), for the words ''three years and with fine'' the words ''one month or with fine'' shall be substituted statement  of  objects  and  reasonsright to freedom of speech and expression is a fundamental principal for any vibrant democracy the founding fathers of indian constitution undoubtedly considered free speech as one of the most basic rights, essential for safeguarding and promoting other human rights while providing for right to free speech under article 19(1)(a) of the constitution, certain reasonable restrictions under article 19(2) have been laid down therefore, free speech can be restricted only on the grounds of reasonable restrictions as mentioned in article 19(2) section 66a of the information technology act, 2000 in its current form is arbitrary and does not adhere to the standards laid down by article 19(2) and the interpretation yardsticks laid down by the hon'ble supreme courtthe phrases used in section 66a such as causing inconvenience, is of menacing character and vague and have a tendency of being used arbitrarily, leading to chilling effects on free speech and other rights of the citizens it provides for criminal recourse for speech that is grossly offensive and aims at merely causing "annoyance" or "inconvenience" these phrases are very subjective and vague and not in conformity with the restrictions mentioned under article 19(2) and thus create new offences hampering the online right to freedom of expressionin the last few years, there have been several instances of misuse of this provision such as the arrests of cartoonists, university professors for posting caricatures for criticizing the government's ineffectiveness and even the arrest of teenagers for questioning shutdown of a city on social networks like facebook these arbitrary arrests highlight the potential abuse of this provision due to the subjective powers conferred on the policemoreover, section 127 of the united kingdom communications act, 2003, from which the phraseology of section 66a has been borrowed was also struck down by the house of lords in the case of director of public prosecutions vs collins it was held that parliament could not have intended to criminalize statements that one person may reasonably find to be polite and acceptable and another may decide to be grossly offensive however, section 66a continues to provide punishment without any safeguard or judicially evolved checks and balances guiding the interpretation regarding the ingredients of the offence warranting invoking of the provisionsection 66a of information technology act provides punishment up to three years of imprisonment and fine without any upper limit the punishment prima-facie is disproportional to the offence mentioned there is no reasonable justification provided as to why punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service should extend to three years with a fine, particularly  when the punishment for criminal nuisance under the indian penal code, 1860 extends to a fine of rupees two thousand with no imprisonment it is not surprising that due to such provisions, india was ranked at 140th place out of 179 countries in the press freedom index, 2013 therefore, the provisions in its current form is violative of several human rights and in direct contravention of the principle of right to free speech and expression and need to be amendedhence this bill annexure extract from the information technology, 2000 (21 of 2000)     66a any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device,—(a) any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; or punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc(b) 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 by making use of such computer resource or a communication device; or(c) any electronic mail or electronic mail message for the purpose of causing annoyance or inconvenience or to deceive or to mislead the addressee or recipient about the origin of such messages, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine      lok  sabha———— a billfurther to amend the information technology act, 2000————(shri jagdambika pal, mp)gmgipmrnd—4746ls(s3)—03-03-2015