Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 12 DECEMBER 2024

Bombay High Court Decision On Fact-checking Rule And Its Implications

JSA Advocates & Solicitors
JSA Advocates & Solicitors
Contributor
JSA Advocates & Solicitors

JSA Advocates & Solicitors

Established in 1991 Our services: JSA is a leading law firm in India with more than 600...

View firm profile
Explore more from JSA Advocates & Solicitors

On September 26, 2024, the Bombay High Court ("Bombay HC") delivered a pivotal ruling in Kunal Kamra vs. Union of India, striking down Rule 3(1)(b)(v) ("Rule") of the Information Technology...

IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Probir Roy Chowdhury
Probir Roy Chowdhury
Yajas Setlur
Yajas Setlur
Moushami Nayak
Moushami Nayak
Author LinkedIn connections

On September 26, 2024, the Bombay High Court ("Bombay HC") delivered a pivotal ruling in Kunal Kamra vs. Union of India1, striking down Rule 3(1)(b)(v) ("Rule") of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2023 ("IDMEC Rules"). This judgment holds significant implications for free speech, online content regulations and intermediary liability in India.

Overview of the Rule and challenge

The Rule, introduced by the Government of India ("GoI") vide the 2023 amendments to the IDMEC Rules, empowered GoI to establish a central Fact-Checking Unit ("FCU") which would perform the role of verifying any content online pertaining to the business of the GoI. The Rule also imposed a duty on intermediaries like social media platforms and news websites to take down content flagged by the FCU to be 'false', 'fake' or 'misleading'. Any failure to do so would result in intermediaries losing their safe harbour protection under

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Instagram’s 2026 AI Labelling Rules

Instagram's 2026 policy shift introduces mandatory AI-generated profile labels and penalties for non-disclosure, creating new compliance challenges at the intersection of platform governance and India's statutory framework for synthetically generated information. How do these overlapping regimes affect brands, influencers, and content creators operating in India's digital ecosystem?
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA)
Global Advertising Lawyers Alliance (GALA)
Article

The Promotion And Regulation Of Online Gaming Act, 2025 And The Promotion And Regulation Of Online Gaming Rules, 2026

The Act, the Rules and the OGAI are therefore simultaneously operational. The prohibition provisions under Chapter III of the Act, the criminal penalties under Chapter V of the Act and the institutional framework under the Rules are all in effect. There is effectively no formal compliance window for core prohibitions and penalties; stakeholders should treat the regime as immediately operational and adjust business models without delay.
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
King, Stubb & Kasiva
King, Stubb & Kasiva
Article

Telegram Ban In India – The Rise Of Digital Sovereignty

The Delhi High Court's landmark ruling in Telegram FZ LLC v. Union of India addresses whether Section 69A of the IT Act permits the government to block an entire platform rather than specific content. Following the NEET-UG 2026 paper leak scandal, where fraudulent channels circulated fake exam papers affecting millions of aspirants, the court upheld the Centre's power to impose a platform-wide ban on Telegram, sparking intense debate about the boundaries between examination integrity and digital censorship.
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Hammurabi & Solomon Partners
Hammurabi & Solomon Partners
Article

DOT Notifies Telecom Network Authorisation Rules, 2026: What Has Changed?

On 20 July 2026, the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) notified the Telecommunications (Authorisation for Telecommunication Network) Rules, 2026 (Rules). The Rules operationalise Section 3(1)(b) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023 and establish a framework for six categories of telecommunication network authorisations: infrastructure provider (IP) (formerly, IP-I), digital connectivity infrastructure provider (DCIP), internet exchange point (IXP) provider, satellite earth station gateway (SESG) provider, cloud-hosted telecommunication network (CTN) provider and mobile number portability (MNP) provider.
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.
Article

The Supreme Court Of India Clarifies: Order II Rule 2 Of The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 Cannot Be A Ground For Rejection Of Plaint Under Order VII Rule 11(D) Of The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908

A two judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India (“Supreme Court”) in S. Valliammai and Ors. vs. S. Ramanathan and Anr. recently held that Order II Rule 2, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) cannot constitute a ground for rejection of plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC. The Supreme Court drew a critical distinction between the two provisions clarifying that while Order II Rule 2 curtails the right to sue for certain claims or reliefs, but it does not bar filing of a suit under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
JSA Advocates & Solicitors
JSA Advocates & Solicitors
Article

Supreme Court Clarifies That Compromise Decrees Asserting Pre-existing Rights Are Not Subject To Registration Or Payment Of Stamp Duty

In the recent case of Mukesh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr., the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India adjudicated on the issue of whether compromise decrees that assert pre-existing rights necessitate registration under the Registration Act, 1908 and are subject to stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act of 1899.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
JSA Advocates & Solicitors
JSA Advocates & Solicitors
Article

Services Sector Employment Rules Take Shape: Model Standing Orders, 2026 Under The Industrial Relations Code, 2020

On May 8, 2026, the Ministry of Labour and Employment notified the Model Standing Orders, 2026 (“Model Standing Orders 2026”) under Section 29(1) of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 (“IR Code”). The notification supersedes the earlier Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Central Rules, 1946 insofar as they related to model standing orders, and prescribes separate model standing orders for the mining, manufacturing and services sectors.
IndiaEmployment and HR
JSA Advocates & Solicitors
JSA Advocates & Solicitors