In a courtroom showdown, the Bombay High Court witnessed a clash of opinions as two fresh petitions challenged the recent amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. The formidable opponents, the Editors Guild of India and the Association of Indian Magazines, had their day in court on Wednesday, facing the dynamic duo of Justice GS Patel and Justice Neela Gokhale.

Swaying the proceedings, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh revealed a surprising twist. The government announced its decision to postpone the formation of the controversial fact-checking body until July 10, pacifying the growing concerns surrounding the IT Rules. This revelation injected a dose of suspense into the courtroom drama.

July 6 is the next date on the court's calendar, where the two new petitions will join forces with the earlier plea filed by the renowned stand-up comic, Kunal Kamra. Their collective bone of contention revolves around the revised Rule 3(1)(b)(v) and Rule 3(i)(II)(A), (C) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023.

Challenging the constitutionality of the amendments, the petitioners argue that they go beyond the boundaries of Section 79 of the Information Technology Act and infringe upon the fundamental rights enshrined in Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 19(1)(a)(g) (freedom to practice any profession or carry on any occupation, trade, or business) of the Constitution.

The contentious amendment introduces the establishment of a fact-checking unit tasked with flagging objectionable content. The critics fear that this move will pressure telecom service providers and social media intermediaries into taking action against content flagged by the fact-checking unit, putting their safe harbor protection under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act at risk.

In a fiery rebuttal, the Central government countered the petitions, emphasizing that false and misleading information could undermine electoral democracy and erode citizens' trust in democratic institutions. However, the division bench didn't shy away from expressing their initial impression, questioning whether the rules truly shielded fair criticism of the government, including parody and satire.

With this courtroom saga still unfolding, Justices GS Patel and Neela Gokhale, and the Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, have emerged as key players in this high-stakes legal battle.

Stay tuned as the Bombay High Court takes center stage in the clash between the IT Rules and the voices demanding justice.