The Supreme Courtdirected the Centre to develop effective guidelines to regulateabusive, obscene, and harmful user-generated content on digital platforms.
Key Observations and Directives
- Independent Regulator:The Court found existing ‘self-regulation mechanisms inadequateand stressed the need for aneutral,autonomous authorityto oversee online content.
- Preventive Mechanisms:Current systems act only after viral content causespsychologicalandreputational harm, highlighting the need for tools that prevent initial spread.
- Free Speech Limits:The Court reaffirmed the protection ofArticle 19(1)(a)but noted that reasonable restrictions underArticle 19(2) must upholddecency,morality, andpublic order.
- Ambiguous Definitions:Broad and vague terms like “anti-national attitudes” can be misused unless precisely defined using judicially tested standards.
- Age Verification:The bench suggested usingAadhaar-basedor similarstrong age-verification modelssince simple disclaimers don’t prevent access to harmful content.
- PwD Protection:It called for enacting astrict law penalising the ridicule ofpersons with disabilities, similar in approach to theSC/ST (Prevention of atrocities) Act
IAS-2026 - OPTIONAL / GEOGRAPHY / PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION / SOCIOLOGY / ANTHROPOLOGY / ORIENTATION ON 03 & 04-10-2025 
