The Supreme Court of India has directed the Centre to revoke the blocking order on the “4PM News” YouTube channel, raising vital questions about the IT Blocking Rules, 2009 and freedom of speech in India.

Supreme Court Orders Unblocking of ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel

In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has been informed that the Central Government has revoked its order to block the popular YouTube channel “4PM News.” Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing journalist Sanjay Sharma, confirmed this during proceedings before Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih.

Case Background: A Challenge to IT Blocking Rules

The petition, titled Sanjay Sharma vs Union of India and Ors, challenges the legality of the action taken under the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009—commonly referred to as the IT Blocking Rules. Despite the revocation of the blocking order, the petition continues to be heard to scrutinize the rules that enabled the initial ban.

“Interim Relief Has Become Infructuous,” Says Sibal

When Justice Gavai questioned whether there was anything left in the case post-unblocking, Sibal responded that the interim relief was now infructuous. Justice Gavai noted that the case would persist for “scholarly purposes,” suggesting its broader implications for digital rights and constitutional freedoms.

Legal Challenge Against Arbitrary Blocking

Sharma’s legal team argues that the blocking of the “4PM News” YouTube channel was arbitrary and unconstitutional, violating his right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. The action, taken by YouTube on the government’s directive, was done without prior notice or a hearing.

Demands for Greater Transparency in Blocking Procedures

The petition calls for:

Disclosure of the blocking order and supporting documents by the Union Government

Repeal or reinterpretation of Rule 16, asserting that “shall” should be treated as a mandatory directive

Interpretation of Rule 8 such that both the intermediary (like YouTube) and the content creator are notified

Striking down or modifying Rule 9 to ensure that individuals receive a copy of the interim blocking order and are given a chance to be heard

Next Steps in the Case

The Supreme Court is considering merging this petition with another case challenging the 2009 IT Blocking Rules. On May 5, notice was issued to the Ministry of Home Affairs, YouTube, and the Union Government, with further hearings expected.

Conclusion: A Landmark Moment for Digital Rights in India

The unblocking of the “4PM News” YouTube channel by the Supreme Court is more than just a win for one journalist—it represents a critical examination of the **IT Blocking Rules, 2009** and their impact on **freedom of expression** in India. This case highlights the urgent need for **greater transparency**, **judicial oversight**, and **constitutional safeguards** in digital governance. As the judiciary continues to deliberate, the outcome could set lasting precedents for how online content is regulated across the country.