Crackdown only on child porn sites, AG Mukul Rohatgi tells SC

NEW DELHI: Backtracking on its controversial decision to ban 857 websites which host pornographic material, the Centre on Monday told the Supreme Court that it was not a totalitarian state that would slap a blanket ban on such sites, engage in moral policing or attempt to know what people do in the privacy of their bedrooms.

Spelling out the stand which came in the wake of the attack the government drew for banning the websites, attorney general Mukul Rohatgi told a bench of Chief Justice H L Dattu and Justices Arun Mishra and Amitava Roy that the crackdown would be limited only to websites circulating child porn.

The AG's statement, which reflects the views the CJI had expressed earlier, will please those who reacted sharply to the banning of the 857 sites based on a list provided by petitioner Kamlesh Vaswani to the Centre. Vaswani had petitioned the court seeking a ban on all websites that circulated child porn. The hearing saw Rohatgi and the bench discuss ing the kinds of porn available, as well as lack of wherewithal to police them and take down those peddling contraband stuff.

Rohatgi explained to the bench that there were different kinds of porn available on the internet, ranging from soft, light, hardcore, violent and rape. "The authorities have blocked websites circulating child pornography ," he said.

The AG's categorization of adult websites left the judges wide-eyed. The CJI asked the AG how he had gathered such profound knowledge about the nature of adult content on the internet. Rohatgi unabashedly replied, "I had to learn about it for the case. My juniors briefed me about it. It is a very grey area. Operation of these sites is not confined to a geographical area. So, how can one stop it?

"If someone is watching it on his phone or in the privacy of his bedroom, how can he be stopped from doing it? Can we do moral policing? We are talking today about Digital India.The PM is trying to connect with millions of citizens through digital medium to get their suggestion and views on various issues." The government's view was a reiteration of the stand taken by the CJI on July 8 when Vaswani's counsel Vijay Panjwani stressed for a ban on websites circulating pornography. The CJI had said banning child pornography was one thing but to ask for a ban on adult websites needed careful and detailed debate.