How to Tackle Fake News from a Legal Perspective

Did you know Globally, fake news can spread up to ten times farther than real news on social networks, despite being shared by less than 0.1% of users? Yes , you heard it right! 

In contemporary times, all countries across the globe are grappling with a never-ending pandemic of FAKE NEWS! The rise of digital communication with inadequate checks and control have led to an explosion of misinformation, travelling to the farthest corners with impunity. With platforms and their easy-to-go rules and regulations, the spread has now reached dangerous levels and consequences, propelling the law to emerge as a critical instrument in combating this phenomenon.

The need of the hour demands an understanding of this pressing issue from legal perspective to become aware of the frameworks, complexities involved in balancing free speech with the need to curb harmful misinformation.

The information that is fabricated to pass off as truth, with an intention to cause harm is “fake news”. It can be anything and everything- political propaganda, false health advisories or defamatory statements. Law related to 'fake news' often infringes on an issue such as defamation, or cybercrime, or public order, or consumer protection, etc (Banaji and Bhat). Because of the relative breadth and vagueness of the term, it is difficult to regulate fake news under a singular legislative clause.

Constitutional and Legal Context in India

Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution gives its citizens the right of freedom of speech and expression. However, Article 19(2) provides for "reasonable restrictions" by the State if it believes that the right poses a threat to the interests of public order, decency, defamation, and the security of the State. Therefore, these constitutional restrictions can be used to regulate fake news depending on its content (Basu).

There are various legislative laws that indirectly deal with fake news. The Indian Penal Code has provisions under Section 153A (creating animosity between classes), Section 295A (acts done to hurt religious feelings), and Section 505 (statements creating public mischief). It can also help as Section 499 defines defamation and can be acted upon for individuals or groups spreading falsehoods. The Information Technology Act of 2000 also contains provisions to deal with false content in the digital space; for example, Section 66D (cheating by personation by using computer resource) and Section 69A (blocking of websites).

Judicial Response

The Indian courts have been vocal about the detrimental impact of fake news and the rampant speed of its dissemination. In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), while striking down Section 66A of the IT Act for being vague and unconstitutional, the Supreme Court emphasized that restrictions on speech must be precise and proportionate. In its judgement the Supreme Court ruled out that wile curbing fake news is of utmost important, the right to freedom of expression must not be throttled in the attempt, and every attempt to regulate fake news must meet constitutional tests of reasonableness and necessity. This necessitates a delicate balancing act because, although fake news is bad, excessive regulation runs the risk of stifling free speech and journalism.

Challenges in Enforcement

Despite the presence of laws to curb the spread of fake news, the enforcement of it remains an uphill task! The fact the most fake news emerges anonymously and outside jurisdiction, and are then disseminated across India, makes their attribution and prosecution complex. Second, it demands a sharp mind and sophisticated judgment to distinguish between fake news and satire, opinion, or unverified reporting. This may not always be allowed by legal frameworks. Third, if fake news is overly criminalised, the institution of free press will start to crumble as the excessive oppressive laws will be used to punish journalists, activists, or political opponents.

The Way Forward

A holistic strategy from legal perspective is a way forward when it comes to handling the spread of fake news. Media houses must incorporate some self-regulatory methods, as well as the accountability mechanics of all digital platforms must be made more stringent. A better framework of law is also needed that can separate false information from opinions so that what’s malicious can be targeted without supressing voices of dissent.

Any limitations must be accompanied by due process protections and judicial supervision. Furthermore, civil remedies—like defamation damages- are frequently more appropriate than criminal prosecution. Beyond the law, digital literacy, fact-checking organizations, and public awareness are essential resources for fostering resistance to false information (Wardle and Derakhshan).

Our counsellors are just a click away.

Call Me

Conclusion

The issue of fake news is entrenched in more convoluted tensions between free speech versus societal protection and consequently, law itself will never adequately solve the problem. We need a balanced framework that includes constitutional safeguards, legislation targeting the specific harms of fake news, and social responsibility to minimize the socio, economic, and political disruptions that fake news causes in our society as a whole. Our legal approach needs to be inclusive, communicative, and holistic in its conception of the changing structured times of technological evolution to ensure that democratic exchanges are informed by truth rather than lies.

References:

• ALEMANNO, Alberto. “Editorial: How to Counter Fake News? A Taxonomy of Anti-Fake News Approaches.” European Journal of Risk Regulation, vol. 9, no. 1, 2018, pp. 1–5. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26408236. Accessed 9 Sept. 2025.
• Banaji, Shakuntala, and Ramnath Bhat. Social Media and Fake News in India: A Study of Youth Practices and Motivations. BBC Media Action, 2019.
• Basu, Durga Das. Introduction to the Constitution of India. 23rd ed., LexisNexis, 2018.
• Shreya Singhal v. Union of India. (2015) 5 SCC 1.
• “Social Media as a News Source.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 8 Aug. 2025, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_media_as_a_news_source. 
• “The Indian Penal Code, 1860.” Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India. Accessed 9 Sept. 2025.
• “Information Technology Act, 2000.” Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India. Accessed 9 Sept. 2025.
• Wardle, Claire, and Hossein Derakhshan. Information Disorder: Toward an Interdisciplinary Framework for Research and Policy Making. Council of Europe, 2017.