Internet Shutdowns: Legal Framework in India
Temporary internet shutdowns in India are governed by the Telecommunications Act, 2023, and the Telecommunications Suspension Rules, 2024. The framework specifies the authorities empowered to issue orders, time limits, review procedures and safeguards for fundamental rights.
Why in the News?
Mobile internet services were suspended within a four-kilometre radius of Delhi’s Jantar Mantar from October 9 to October 10, 2026, ahead of a protest against the Chief Election Commissioner. The incident has brought the legal framework governing internet shutdowns into focus.
Legal Framework
Telecommunications Act, 2023: Section 20(2)(b) empowers the Central and State Governments to suspend telecommunication services during a public emergency or in the interest of public safety on specified grounds.
Telecommunications (Temporary Suspension of Services) Rules, 2024: Introduced in November 2024, these rules replaced the 2017 rules. Orders must state the reasons, affected area, services suspended and duration. The maximum duration of an order is 15 days.
Review mechanism: Orders must be sent to the relevant Review Committee within 24 hours, and the committee must examine them within five days.
Who Can Order a Shutdown?
The Union Home Secretary can issue orders for the Central Government, while the State Home Secretary can do so for a State Government.
In unavoidable circumstances, an authorised officer of at least Joint Secretary rank may issue an order, subject to confirmation by the competent authority within 24 hours.
Key Provisions of the 2024 Rules
Written reasons: Every suspension order must record the reasons for the restriction.
Publication: Orders must be made public and specify the affected geographical area, services suspended and duration.
Duration: An order cannot remain in force for more than 15 days.
Review: The order must be sent to the relevant review committee within 24 hours. The committee must meet within five days and examine its legality.
Proportionality: Authorities must consider whether the objective can be achieved through less restrictive alternatives.
Judicial Safeguards
Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020): The Supreme Court held that indefinite internet shutdowns are impermissible and that restrictions must satisfy the tests of necessity and proportionality.
Faheema Shirin v. State of Kerala (2019): The Kerala High Court recognised the importance of internet access in exercising fundamental rights, including education and privacy.
Press freedom: The Supreme Court has recognised freedom of the press as part of Article 19(1)(a).
Can Phone Calls Continue?
Ordinary voice calls and SMS may continue if the order suspends only mobile internet services.
Internet-based calls, such as WhatsApp calls, require an internet connection.
In certain situations, authorities have also suspended voice calls, SMS and broadband services, depending on the scope of the order.
Significance
Internet shutdowns may be used to address public-order concerns, but they can disrupt education, business, healthcare and access to information.
Clear orders, legal review and proportionate restrictions are essential to balance public safety with fundamental rights.
Key Drivers of Internet Shutdowns
Conflict and violence: Governments suspend internet services during communal violence, armed conflicts and border tensions to restrict mobilisation and maintain public order.
Protests and political instability: Shutdowns may be imposed during demonstrations, elections and political unrest, limiting public communication and opposition activities.
Concealment of human rights violations: Internet blackouts can prevent the documentation and reporting of violence and civil rights abuses. Such concerns have arisen in Myanmar, Sudan, Gaza and Iran.
Implications of Internet Shutdowns
Restriction of civil liberties: Shutdowns limit freedom of expression, access to information and online participation.
Economic losses: They disrupt businesses, banking, online transactions, education and other essential services.
Humanitarian challenges: Communication blackouts can obstruct emergency response, rescue operations and the delivery of humanitarian assistance.
Reduced accountability: Restricted connectivity can prevent journalists and citizens from reporting abuses and scrutinising government actions.
Digital exclusion: Prolonged shutdowns disproportionately affect students, small businesses and vulnerable communities dependent on online services.
Way Forward
Use internet shutdowns only as a last resort in exceptional circumstances.
Ensure transparent orders, timely review and judicial accountability.
Prefer targeted restrictions and lawful enforcement measures over blanket shutdowns wherever feasible.
Protect emergency communication systems and access to essential digital services.
Balance national security and public order with constitutional freedoms.
Practice Question
Q. With reference to the legal framework governing internet shutdowns in India, consider the following statements:
Under the Telecommunications (Temporary Suspension of Services) Rules, 2024, an internet suspension order may remain in force for up to 30 days, provided that the Review Committee approves it.
In unavoidable circumstances, an authorised officer of at least Joint Secretary rank may issue a suspension order, subject to confirmation by the competent authority within 24 hours.
In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court held that indefinite internet shutdowns are impermissible and that restrictions must satisfy the tests of necessity and proportionality.
Suspension of mobile internet services necessarily results in the suspension of ordinary voice calls and SMS.
Which of the statements given above are correct?
(a) 1 and 2 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 1, 3 and 4 only
(d) 2, 3 and 4 only
Answer: (b) 2 and 3 only
Explanation
The Telecommunications (Temporary Suspension of Services) Rules, 2024, prescribe a maximum duration of 15 days for a suspension order. Hence, Statement 1 is Incorrect.
In unavoidable circumstances, an authorised officer of at least Joint Secretary rank may issue an order, subject to confirmation by the competent authority within 24 hours. Hence, Statement 2 is Correct.
In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court held that indefinite internet shutdowns are impermissible and that restrictions must satisfy the tests of necessity and proportionality. Hence, Statement 3 is Correct.
Ordinary voice calls and SMS may continue if the order suspends only mobile internet services. Hence, Statement 4 is Incorrect.