LANDMARK CASE

Shreya Singhal v. Union of India

(2015) 5 SCC 1 · Supreme Court of India · Cyber law

At a glance

  • Citation: (2015) 5 SCC 1
  • Court: Supreme Court of India
  • Area of law: Cyber law
  • In one line: Section 66A was struck down as vague and overbroad. Section 79 was read down so intermediaries act only on court or government orders.

1 Facts

Section 66A of the IT Act punished sending 'offensive' or 'annoying' messages online. Arrests over social media posts led to challenges.

2 Issue

Does Section 66A violate freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a)?

3 What the court decided

Section 66A was struck down as vague and overbroad. Section 79 was read down so intermediaries act only on court or government orders.

4 Why it matters

A landmark for online free speech and intermediary liability.

5 Think about it

Why is vagueness especially dangerous in laws that restrict speech?

6 Analyse it yourself

Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.

7 More cases on Cyber law

All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz

← Sheela Barse v. Union of IndiaSmith v. Hughes →

A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.