Is the growing demand for stricter regulation of online content justified, or does it pose a threat to the right to freedom of speech and expression? Examine in light of recent judicial pronouncements.

The controversy regarding Danag Faina's latest shows the agencies sparked debate on regulating social media content along within balance of right to freedom of speech and expression (Article 19) Justification for growing demand of strict social media regulation: 1) Unrestricted freedom of speech of one person violates freedom of another 2) Article 19 has reasonable restriction 3) Banning vulgar content [eg how banned many OTT apps] 4) Spread of anti-national propaganda [online] through Facebook 5) Ensuring friendly relations with foreign state 6) Ensuring social media content in line with public morality Strict regulation: violation of right to freedom of speech and expression 1) Any online content gains traction because of social acceptance not 2) Strict regulation [with state] artistic freedom 3) Imposed morality by state restricts organic social evolution 4) Right to freedom of speech and existence necessary for right to life with dignity (Article 21) 5) Judiciary adopting scale of charges to laying out social morality 6) Freedom of speech & expression symbol of vibrant democracy 7) Dissent strengthens democracy Thus restrictions (Digital Media Intermediaries Act) should be reasonable, proportional & legal to maintain harmonious balance