The Supreme Court has been approached with a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the suspension of mobile internet services in parts of central Delhi during protests against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The petition, filed by advocate Narendra Kumar Goswami under Article 32 of the Constitution, seeks judicial scrutiny of the decision-making process behind the temporary restriction and the exercise of executive powers to curtail digital communication.
The shutdown was imposed for a 24-hour period, from 10 pm on October 9 to 10 pm on October 10, covering an area within a four-kilometre radius of the Janpath–Kartavya Path crossing. The restriction coincided with demonstrations called in connection with the controversy surrounding the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.
In his petition, Goswami has sought production of the original order authorising the suspension, along with the recorded reasons and supporting material relied upon by the authorities. The plea also seeks disclosure of records showing whether officials considered less restrictive alternatives before deciding to suspend mobile internet services.
A key aspect of the challenge concerns compliance with the statutory safeguards governing telecommunications shutdowns. The petitioner has sought details of the proceedings conducted by the designated Review Committee, including records demonstrating whether the suspension was examined in accordance with the applicable legal framework.
The petition raises questions about the limits of executive discretion when restrictions on digital communication affect a large number of citizens. It argues for transparency in decisions that interfere with access to the internet, particularly when such measures are introduced in response to anticipated public gatherings.
The plea also places emphasis on the need to establish whether the restrictions were necessary and proportionate to the security concerns cited by the authorities. It seeks scrutiny of whether the stated objectives could have been achieved through narrower measures that would have caused less disruption to communication services.
The matter brings renewed attention to the legal principles governing internet shutdowns in India, including the requirement that restrictions must satisfy applicable statutory procedures and constitutional standards. The Supreme Court’s earlier jurisprudence has stressed the importance of proportionality, temporary duration and procedural safeguards in decisions affecting internet access.
The petition seeks disclosure of the relevant government records so that the legality of the shutdown and adherence to prescribed safeguards can be examined. The filing raises broader concerns about accountability in the exercise of emergency-style executive powers and the importance of ensuring that restrictions on digital communication remain subject to legal scrutiny.
The filing of the PIL does not, by itself, establish that the shutdown was unlawful. Its central request is for the government to produce the underlying orders, reasons and review records so that compliance with the law can be assessed.
The post Supreme Court moved over Delhi internet shutdown; Advocate N.K. Goswami challenges executive authority to suspend digital services appeared first on India Legal.