Gujarat High Court rejects PIL of Delhi based Internet Freedom Foundation that sought removal of ban on PUBG online game

Ahmedabad: The Gujarat High Court today rejected a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Delhi based outfit Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) challenging the ban imposed by authorities on playing PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds, or PUBG online game by authorities in several cities across the state and arrests made for it.

The Court of Acting Chief Justice A S Dave and Justice Biren Vaishnav rejected the plea that there was no public interest involved in it. The court however observed that those arrested for playing the game could approach the court at their own.

Notably following a letter from home department last month, the game was banned in many cities in Gujarat including Ahmedabad through notification’s from police chief offices. It has been lifted at many places including Ahmedabad but was in place till April 30 at some other places including Rajkot city.

The IIF had on April 4, filed the PIL in the wake of media reports that close to 21 young persons, many of them college students, were arrested for playing the game. This game, ‘PUBG’ was banned through proclamations made under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The IIF prior to filing this petition, on 14 March, had also issued a public appeal for revoking these Section 144 orders and ceasing criminal prosecutions against people for playing PUBG.

The organization in a statement today said that the collateral consequences of a criminal conviction can affect a person’s ability to get admission into a college, find a job, rent a house, obtain a visa and so on. This is a serious matter and a criminal conviction for playing PUBG would impose significant disabilities on the 21 young people who have been arrested. We sensed that this required urgent intervention as was extensively pleaded in the writ petition. However, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court when the case came up for hearing today, refused to hear the petition at the threshold. This means it has refused to hear the case and dismissed it at the preliminary stage. In such a situation, a short order is usually issued by the court setting out its reasons which we will make available publicly as and when it is uploaded. We were represented by an excellent legal team comprising of Asim Pandya and Manan Bhatt and we are deeply thankful to them.

During today’s hearing, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court mentioned that individuals who have been arrested for playing PUBG in contravention of Section 144 orders may approach the High Court on their own. However, this observation is subject to confirmation in the written order. We had anticipated such a concern and addressed it in Para 2.13 of our petition where we noted that young college students who have been arrested may not have the resources and support to withstand protracted litigation against the Police Department. However, the Hon’ble High Court did not agree with our submission.In terms of next steps, we will confer with our legal team and keep you informed. We hope and are confident that the legal merits of such orders will be examined by our courts on the touchstones of our fundamental rights and constitutional principles,’ the statement said.