The Bombay High court on Tuesday asked the country’s federal government to file a reply as to why an interim stay should not be given to the implementation of the Information Technology (IT) Rules, 2021, as demanded by two petitions.

A bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice G S Kulkarni sought the government’s reply by August 12.

The petitions filed by digital news portal  `The Leaflet’ and journalist Nikhil Wagle claimed that the new regulations are ‘vague’, ‘draconian’, and bound to have a ‘chilling effect’ on the freedom of press and right to free speech guaranteed by the Constitution, PTI reported from Mumbai.

Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, the federal government’s lawyer, urged the court not to grant a stay without a final hearing.

Counsel for  The Leaflet had argued earlier that the new rules were a brazen attempt to regulate online content. They go beyond the parameters set by the Information Technology Act and limits set under Article 19 of the Constitution, he said.

On Tuesday, the HC asked if it could grant an interim stay to the rules with the petitioners agreeing, for now, not to publish anything in violation of the restrictions under Article 19 (which defines the freedom of speech and its limits) and the federal government promising not to take coercive action against them under the new rules until the court gives its final decision.

“Suppose we accept your (petitioners’) argument and grant a stay. So the rules will remain in suspension. If you fail in the writ (petition) and rules are violated in the interim, you cannot use our orders to seek relief if you fail in the writ…And the Union does not take any coercive action as per the new rules?” the HC said.

Counsel for  The Leaflet  said the petitioners always adhere to the restrictions under Article 19 and oppose only the new rules, which go beyond Article 19.

“As long as Article 19 (2) is the only limit, there is no difficulty,” the lawyer added.

However, the government’s lawyer opposed the court’s proposal. “Instead of granting an interim stay, the final matter can be heard,” the government lawyer said.

The court pointed out that similar petitions opposing the new rules have been filed in high courts across the country, but the deferral government was yet to file its replies.

If a stay was not granted, the petitioners will be under ‘constant fear’ of adverse action whenever they publish anything online, the judges said.

“File a short affidavit on why interim relief should not be granted,” the HC told the federal government, adjourning the hearing to August 13.

Reporting on the case involving itself, The Leaflet said its petition contended that the IT Rules 2021 impose unreasonable, excessive, and tenuous burdens on digital news publishers, which are designed to restrict and narrow the scope of reporting undertaken by such publishers and place unfeasible economic hardship on them, thereby imposing a disproportionate burden that directly violates the rights of the press that are protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.

The Court also heard senior journalist Nikhil Wagle’s petition challenging the IT Rules. Advocate Abhay Nevagi is representing Wagle.

Interestingly, the Kerala High Court had given interim relief in a similar case to Live Law, digital publishers of legal news. The same court had directed the government or its agencies from taking any coercive action till the case is disposed of against members of News Broadcasters Association, an industry body representing news TV channels, over non-compliance of the IT Rules.

The federal government has requested the Supreme Court, also hearing a case relating to IT Rules, to transfer all other cases in lower cases to itself with an aim to hear them together as all of them challenge the implementation of the new digital norms for varied reasons.