Conquer Mains 2025

Lecture Two
 Theme/Topics
1. Right to Internet Access & Internet Shutdowns
2. Trolling
3. Theme: Elections
 1. Right to Internet Access.
• Faheema Shirin.R.K vs State Of Kerala (2019) – Kerala HC
• Held that access to the internet is part of the right to education and the right
to privacy under Article 21.
• Quoted UN General Assembly Resolution of 2014 which called upon all States
to promote and facilitate access to the Internet
 Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020)

• The Court held that freedom of speech and expression through the internet is
a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a).
• The right to carry on trade or business using the internet is protected under
Article 19(1)(g).
• Restrictions must be reasonable & follow principles of proportionality.
• Internet shutdowns cannot be indefinite, and the government must publish
orders for such shutdowns.
• a perpetual internet shut-down would fail the test of proportionality; and , that
the State’s argument that it couldn’t selectively block websites because of a
lack of technology could not be accepted
 Significance
• Enables access to diverse viewpoints, news, and platforms of
expression.
• Especially vital for students in rural/remote areas.
• Supports Digital India and NEP 2020 goals.
• Ensures access to government schemes, public services (Aadhaar, DBT,
telemedicine).
• Enables remote work, gig economy.
• Boosts employment and financial inclusion (UPI)
• A digitally connected population reduces geographical disadvantage.
 Internet Shutdowns
• Internet shutdowns, often justified on grounds of
national security, increasingly raise concerns over their
impact on civil liberties, especially freedom of speech
and the right to life under Articles 19 and 21 of the
Constitution.
• Access Now - In 2024, India experienced 84 internet
shutdowns, making it the highest among democratic
nations.
• Thinkers like John Stuart Mill emphasized that curtailing liberty should
be the last resort, especially when the harm principle is not clearly
violated. Blanket shutdowns often affect essential services like
education, healthcare, and financial transactions, disproportionately
harming marginalized communities.
• Thus, while national security is non-negotiable, internet shutdowns
must adhere to constitutional safeguards. Judicial oversight,
transparent procedures, and alternative targeted measures are
essential to balance security imperatives with democratic freedoms.
 Statute
• Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 was repealed by the Telecommunications
Act, 2023
• Temporary Suspension of Telecommunication Services Rules, 2024,
 Practice
• Internet shutdowns in India often pose a conflict
between national security and civil liberties. Critically
analyse with reference to judicial rulings. (150 Words)
 2. Trolling
Trolling refers to the act of deliberately posting provocative, offensive, or
misleading messages online— especially on social media platforms,
forums, or comment sections—with the intent to upset, anger, or
provoke others into an emotional response or to disrupt meaningful
discussion.
According to Whitney Phillips (who has done research on online
misinformation): Trolling is the act of behaving badly online simply for
the pleasure of eliciting a reaction.
With the phenomenal rise of social media in India but little Internet
literacy, there is a pattern of platforms being regularly used for hate
speech, abusive comments, and deliberate distortion of facts.
• Doxxing is the act of publicly revealing or publishing private, personal, or
identifying information about an individual—such as their home address,
phone number, workplace, or private communications—without their consent,
usually with malicious intent.
• The term originates from “dropping docs” (documents), and it's most
commonly associated with online harassment, intimidation, or revenge.
• The public sphere may have become more participatory, but that does
not necessarily ensure civil behaviour. Surveys have shown that
women, minorities and marginalised communities are particularly
targeted by trolls.
• The extreme reactions often include rape and death threats. With
surveillance now the byword for all tech companies, surely it should
not take long to locate and end the online run of trolls.
• A stringent anti-troll law must be put in place to stop the acute
mental and physical harassment trolls can cause.
• In the Shaviya Sharma case (2024), the Delhi High Court had noted
that “there can be no doubt that acts of doxing if permitted to go on
unchecked could result in violation of right to privacy”.
• In a democracy, all voices should be heard but disinformation and
misinformation must be stopped with the help of guidelines and the
law.
• India lacks a dedicated law specifically aimed at tackling online hate speech
and trolling. Instead, a limited number of provisions under the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, and the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000,
cover certain aspects of cyberbullying. The BNS contains provisions applicable
to electronic communications, such as Section 74 (assault or criminal force
against a woman with intent to outrage her modesty), Section 75 (sexual
harassment), Section 351 (criminal intimidation), Section 356 (defamation),
and Section 196 (promoting enmity between groups). The IT Act supplements
these offences with provisions like Section 66C (identity theft), Section 66D
(impersonation fraud) and Section 67 (publishing or transmitting obscene
material electronically).
• There is no clear law that punishes ongoing online abuse if it is not
clearly obscene, threatening, or fraudulent. The provision on stalking in
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita applies only when a man targets a woman
and focuses on personal attention, so it does not cover group-based
online harassment like trolling. Although some forms of cyberbullying
might be covered under laws like criminal intimidation or defamation,
these need proof of a threat or damage to reputation. Such laws are
not effective against the fast and anonymous attacks by online mobs.
Tehseen Poonawala Case (2018)
• An automatic FIR against people promoting enmity between different
groups will be registered against individuals who incite people and
spread fake news on social media.
• The State Governments shall prepare a lynching/mob violence victim
compensation scheme
 Caution
• Regulating the internet, or freedom of expression on the
internet, is both undesirable on principle as well as ineffective.
• The law if enacted will be misused by the political party in power
to stifle dissent and jail the dissenters.
• The real change has to begin from home – how we raise our kids
(particularly boys).
• Ironically, India did have an anti-troll law. Section 66 (A) of the
Information Technology Act, 2000 contained provisions for internet
trolls who posted ‘offensive content’ online.
• However, in the 2015 case of Shreya Singhal v Union of India, this law
was challenged for being violative of the right to freedom of speech
enshrined in the Constitution.
• The Supreme Court, in its judgement, elucidated that the importance
of freedom of speech outweighed the significance of this law and
subsequently, the provision was rescinded.
 Global Picture

• Malicious Communication Act of UK (1988)

• Harmful Digital Communication Act of New Zealand (2015)
• The United States, however, does not have the same standpoint.
The First Amendment guaranteed the right to freedom of expression to
the people and the American Jurisprudence crowns it with supreme
importance. No law can abridge the American freedom of speech.
 SC Observation in 2020
• Freedom of speech is one of the most abused freedoms in the
recent times,” a Bench headed by Chief Justice of India SA Bobde
said while hearing a petition filed by the Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind,
an Islamic body in India, which accused the media of
communalising the Tablighi Jamaat event and demonising the
Muslim community.
 Practice

• Online trolling poses a serious threat to freedom of expression,

mental health, and digital democracy. Examine the adequacy of
existing legal provisions in India to address online trolling.
Suggest legal and policy reforms to strike a balance between free
speech and protection from online abuse. (250 words)
Theme: Elections
 Theme 1: Appointments
• Between two elections, normally there would be a period of five years. We cannot have an Election
Commission sitting all the time during those five years doing nothing.
• The Chief Election Commissioner will continue to be a whole-time officer performing the duties of his
office and looking after the work from day to day, but when major elections take place in the country,
either Provincial or Central, the Commission must be enlarged to cope with the work. More members
therefore have to be added to the Commission. They are no doubt to be appointed by the President, but
as the House will find, they are to be appointed from time to time. Once they are appointed for a
particular period, they are not removable at the will of the President. Therefore, to that extent their
independence is ensured.
• So there is no reason to believe that these temporary Election Commissioners will not have the
necessary measure of independence. Anyway, the Chief Election Commissioner, an independent officer,
will be the Chairman and, being a permanent officer, will have naturally directing and supervising power
over the whole Commission.
• Therefore, it is not correct to say that the independence of the Commission is taken away to any
extent.

• KM Munshi argued in the Constituent Assembly that the election

commission must balance independence with central oversight to
ensure impartiality and practicality.
 Anoop Baranwal v Union of India (2023)

1. Does the current process for ECI appointments violate the right to
equality?
2. Does the current process for ECI appointments violate the right to
free and fair elections?
 Chief Election Commissioner and other Election
Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Office and
Terms of Office) Act, 2023.
 In favour
1. Considered will of the people expressed through the
Parliament.
2. The Act provides a clear legislative framework for appointing
the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and other Election
Commissioners (ECs), addressing the previous ambiguity due
to the absence of a specific law under Article 324(2) of the
Constitution. This move is a step towards institutionalizing the
appointment process.
3. Involving the LoP of Lok Sabha introduces a level of bipartisan
oversight, which was previously lacking.
 Criticism
• The inclusion of a Union Minister nominated by the Prime Minister,
alongside the Prime Minister himself, raises concerns about executive
overreach. With two out of three members of the selection committee
being from the ruling government, there is apprehension that
appointments could be influenced by partisan interests, undermining
the Election Commission's autonomy.
• Against the spirit of Anoop Baranwal Judgment.
• Parliamentary authority being exercised to further executive
dominance.
• While the Act seeks to formalize the appointment process of Election
Commissioners through legislation, concerns persist regarding the
potential for executive dominance and the exclusion of judicial
oversight. The debate underscores the need to balance institutional
independence with accountability to uphold the integrity of India's
democratic processes.
• There is a need to amend Article 324 to enhance the independence of
the Election Commission of India.
 Theme 2: Steps taken by Election
Commission of India
1. The Election Commission of India (ECI) softened its stand about disclosing
absolute numbers of booth-wise votes cast in elections (Form 17-C). The
CEC is open to meeting representatives of organisations and individuals who
have sought a direction to the ECI to upload scanned, authenticated and
legible copies of Form 17-C on its website.
2. Recognizing the growing influence of artificial intelligence in political
campaigns, the ECI issued advisories to political parties, urging them to
label AI-generated content prominently. This move aimed to combat
misinformation and ensure voters are [Link] requires parties to
clearly label any images, videos, audio or other materials generated or
significantly altered by AI technologies with notations such as “AI-
Generated”, “Digitally Enhanced”, or “Synthetic Content”.
3. EPIC linkage with the respective Aadhaar number to weed out
duplicate entries (although ECI has clarified that providing Aadhaar is
not mandatory).
4. The ECI invited all national and state parties to submit suggestions
for strengthening the electoral process.
5. The ECI mandated that political parties remove any fake content from
their social media platforms within three hours of noticing such
content.
 Criticism
• Failure to bring election manifestos under MCC.
• Failure in controlling the freebie culture.
• Delay in releasing voter turnout figures promptly.
• Soft on MCC violations.
 More to Do
• The EC should revoke the ‘Star Campaigner’ status of a leader, in case of any
serious violation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC), thereby depriving the
party candidates of expenditure relief for their campaigns.
• Under the Symbols order, the EC has the power to suspend or withdraw the
recognition of a recognised political party for its failure to observe MCC or
follow lawful directions of the Commission. Strict action under this provision
against bigger parties would have a salutary effect in ensuring adherence to
the MCC.
• With respect to election expenditure, the law must be amended to explicitly
provide that ‘financial assistance’ by a political party to its candidate should
also be within the limits of election expenditure prescribed for a candidate.
• There should also be a ceiling on expenditure by
political parties.
• The Supreme Court direction to candidates as well as
political parties to issue declarations about criminal
antecedents, at least three times before election, in a
widely circulated newspaper in the locality and in
electronic media, should be strictly enforced. This would
enable a voter to make a well-informed choice.
 Theme 3: Delimitation
• Delimitation is the act of fixing or refixing the
boundaries of constituencies. This is done by the
Delimitation Commission only after the Census is taken.

• Readjustment.

• Election Commission carried out Delimitation in

Assam.
 Difference between 42nd & 84th
Amendment
• The 42nd Amendment froze the number of seats allocated based on the 1971
Census and declared that there would be no reallocation till the results of the
2001 Census were published. This amendment gave no reasons for postponing
the readjustment.
• In 2002, by 84th Amendment the readjustment was postponed by another 25
years by the. This time, the reason for not allocating seats according to each
state’s population was striking:
• “Keeping in view the progress of family planning programmes in different
parts of the country, the Government, as part of the National Population Policy
strategy, … decided to extend the current freeze on undertaking fresh
delimitation up to the year 2026 as a motivational measure to enable State
Governments to pursue the agenda for population stabilisation.”
 Conduct It
1. A key principle of democracy is that every citizen’s vote should have the
same value. But right now, that’s not the case. For example, one MP in Uttar
Pradesh represents about 30 lakh people, while an MP in Kerala represents
only around 18 lakh. This means people in some states have less influence
than others. Delimitation is meant to fix this by making sure all
constituencies have a more equal number of voters. To respect “one person,
one vote, one value”.
2. Delimitation offers an opportunity to reinforce India's federal structure by
ensuring that all states have representation commensurate with their
populations.
3. Carrying out delimitation exercise is not an option but a constitutional
imperative which should not be delayed any further.
 Don’t Conduct
• Scholar Alistair McMillan in Redistricting in Comparative
Perspective points out that between 2001 to 2026 the population
of Uttar Pradesh has increased by 55.33%, and Bihar by 51.4%.
In contrast, the increase in Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and
Karnataka has been 15.5 per cent, 28 per cent and 24.2 per cent
respectively.
• Therefore, a delimitation exercise would adversely affect the
southern states and would amount to penalising good performing
states.
 Deviation - asymmetric federalism

• Although Article 81 mandates the same proportionality for all states,

this is only “so far as practicable”.
• These words in Article 81(2) have enabled significant departures from
proportionality. For example, Goa has two members in the Lok Sabha
for a population of 1.5 million, but New Delhi, with a population of
33.80 million, has seven.
• Similarly, the northeastern states have a larger number of MPs in
proportion to their population.
 Arvind Datar
• An examination of the functioning of Parliament and state assemblies
over the last 30 years establishes that an increase in their numerical
strength will make no difference. If the number of MPs had been
increased to 700 in the last decade, it would have resulted neither in
better laws being passed nor in the improved functioning of the Lok
Sabha.
• There are several disadvantages to having more legislators. In the first
place, there is a huge cost to the exchequer by way of increased
housing and other infrastructural expenses.
• The strength of the Council of Ministers can be up to 15 per cent of the
total number of members for the Lok Sabha. Therefore, strength of
Council of Ministers would expand at the Union and the states level
with little or no improvement in administration or in resolving India’s
economic and social challenges.
• The need of the hour is a united India, not a bigger Parliament.
• An analysis by Milan Vaishnav and Jamie Hintson shows the likely
result if the Lok Sabha seats are reallocated in proportion to
each state’s projected population in 2026. In this scenario, all
the South Indian states would be losers.
• Hindi v Non-Hindi
• This goes against the spirit of non-dominance that underlies the
Indian Union and the idea of unity in diversity.
 Alternatives
• Allow increase in the size of Assemblies in States while permanently
freezing the strength of Lok Sabha.
 Yogendra Yadav
• Holding-together federalism.
• A national consensus on this contract would be a step
towards what Partha Chatterjee calls a “just republic”,
the foundational principle of the Republic of India.
 Solution
• A fair formula for readjustment of seats would be to take the State
which has registered the lowest increase in population as the template.
Figures show that Kerala is the State which has registered the lowest
growth in population since 1971. The population of Kerala has
registered an increase of 68% - can be considered a reasonable
growth. So a 68% step-up in the number of seats in all States
can be a reasonable basis for readjustment – meaning all states
should see a 68% increase in the seats allocated to them in Lok
Sabha.
 SC Ruling
• The Supreme Court in Kishorchandra Chhanganlal Rathod v. Union of
India (2024) has asserted the power of judicial review over the
Delimitation Commission’s orders, marking a bold and crucial step
towards fortifying democratic principles in Indian electoral
jurisprudence.
• The SC held that nothing ousts the constitutional courts from
scrutinising the validity of orders passed by the Delimitation
Commission on the touchstone of the constitution, especially if an
order is found to be “manifestly arbitrary” and “irreconcilable to
constitutional values”.
 Theme 4: Lifetime ban on convicts
contesting elections
• Instead of 6-year ban.
• “The Election Commission may, for reasons to be recorded,
remove any disqualification under this Chapter 1 [(except under
section 8A)] or reduce the period of any such disqualification,”
• 8A. Disqualification on ground of corrupt practices.
 Q
• Critically evaluate the need to enforce a lifetime
ban on convicts contesting elections. (250 Words)
 Against
• Deterrence is ensured while undue harshness is avoided.
• A crucial distinction between the basis of disqualification and the
effects of disqualification. The basis of disqualification is
conviction for an offence. But the basis of the disqualification
becomes non-existent when the period of the conviction ends.
• Not the scope of a PIL - imposing a life ban would amount to
rewriting Section 8 by replacing ‘six years’ with ‘life-long’. The
Supreme Court cannot legislate. That is entirely the domain of
Parliament.
 In Favour
• Once convicted, how can people come back to Parliament and
Legislatures? There is an apparent conflict of interest
• Upholds public faith in democracy and electoral politics.
• Lifetime bans act as a strong disincentive for politicians from indulging
in crime.
• Violation of Article 14 if allowed to continue as govt employees lose
their jobs permanently if convicted of serious crimes.
• 5,000 criminal cases against MPs and MLAs are pending
despite directions passed by the apex court from time
to time to facilitate their speedy disposal.
• 42% of sitting Lok Sabha members have criminal cases.