The Supreme Court on Monday issued notices to states, Union Territories and registrars-general of high courts, seeking an explanation for the continued use of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act although it had been declared unconstitutional in 2015.

While seeking a response from the authorities concerned within four weeks, a bench of Justices R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai told senior advocate Sanjay Parekh, appearing for the petitioner Peoples Union for Civil Liberties, that it was necessary to implead the states and Union Territories as law and order fell under their respective domains.

At the last hearing on July 1, the top court had expressed “shock” and “amazement” at the manner in which people were still being booked under Section 66A of the IT Act for voicing their opinions on the Internet.

“It’s amazing and shocking. That’s what I can say. Shreya Singhal is a 2015 judgment. What is going on in the country is terrible,” Justice Nariman had observed.

Attorney-general K.K. Venugopal, on behalf of the Union government, had at that time accepted the court’s notice and sought two weeks to file the Centre’s counter-affidavit.

However, the Centre is yet to file its response.

On Monday, when the matter came up for hearing, the bench underscored the need to make the states/UTs and high court registrars respondents in the matter because apart from the executive, several courts in the country continued to entertain complaints under Section 66A of the IT Act.

In its petition filed through advocate Aparna Bhat, PUCL has urged the apex court to direct the Centre to collect all data regarding FIRs or investigations where Section 66A had been invoked as well as pendency of cases in courts across the country.

At the last hearing, Venugopal had admitted that Section 66A was still there in most of the law books despite being struck down by the apex court.

“When police has to register a case, the section is still there and only has a footnote that the SC has struck it down. There has to be a bracket in 66A with words struck down,” the country’s highest law officer said.

According to PUCL, the Supreme Court had in a subsequent order on February 15, 2019, directed the states and Union Territories to desist from invoking Section 66A, but the police continue to file cases under the provision.

“…the applicant discovered that Section 66A of the IT Act has continued to be in use not only within police stations but also in cases before trial courts across India,” the PUCL stated.