The Supreme Court was informed on Tuesday that the blocking order against popular YouTube news channel ‘4PM’, which boasts a subscriber base of over 73 lakh, has been withdrawn.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for petitioner Sanjay Sharma, editor of the digital platform 4PM, told a bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and Augustine George Masih, “They have withdrawn the blocking order.”
The development came during the hearing of Sharma’s plea seeking the quashing of the order that led to the blocking of his channel. According to the petition, the blocking was carried out by an intermediary based on an undisclosed directive allegedly issued by the Centre, citing vague grounds of “national security” and “public order.”
Sibal further urged the court to tag Sharma’s petition with other pending matters challenging Rule 16 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009. Sharma’s petition also contests Rule 16, which mandates strict confidentiality about requests and complaints regarding blocking actions.
The petition seeks that Rule 9 of the Blocking Rules be struck down or read down to ensure that a notice, opportunity of hearing, and copy of any interim order be provided to the content creator prior to any final action.
Earlier on May 5, the apex court had sought responses from the Centre and others on Sharma’s plea, which described the blocking as a “chilling assault on journalistic independence” and a violation of the public’s right to receive information.
Filed through advocate Talha Abdul Rahman, the plea argued that no blocking order or related complaint was ever communicated to the petitioner, breaching statutory and constitutional safeguards. It asserted, “National security and public order are not talismanic invocations to insulate executive action from scrutiny.”
The petition maintained that the blocking of the channel without prior notice was not only ultra vires of the parent statute but also struck at the very core of democratic accountability secured by a free press.
The plea also urged the Supreme Court to direct the Centre to produce any records or reasons associated with the blocking order and demanded that such orders be quashed. It argued that Blocking Rules, including Rules 8, 9, and 16, infringe upon fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution, specifically the rights to freedom of speech and expression, equality, and personal liberty.
