Which section of the Information Technology Act 2000 was struck down to prevent people from being wrongly prosecuted for online speech and expression?

Introduction / Context:
The Information Technology Act 2000 is the main law governing cyber activities in India. One of its provisions, Section 66A, became very controversial because it was used to arrest people for social media posts and other online expression. The Supreme Court finally struck down this section to protect freedom of speech. This question checks whether you remember that Section 66A, not other sections, was the one that was removed for this reason.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The question is about the Information Technology Act 2000.
• It focuses on a section that was removed to avoid wrongful prosecution of people for online speech.
• The options list four different section numbers: 66A, 96A, 69A, and 76A.
• We assume awareness of the famous Supreme Court judgment related to online freedom of expression.

Concept / Approach:
Section 66A of the IT Act criminalised sending offensive messages through communication services. It used vague terms like grossly offensive and menacing, which allowed misuse. In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court held this section unconstitutional as it violated the right to freedom of speech and expression under the Constitution of India. Other sections, such as Section 69A, are still in force and deal with blocking of websites under strict procedures, not with this particular controversy.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Recall the famous case related to online speech where the Supreme Court struck down a provision of the IT Act. Step 2: Remember that the section involved in that case was Section 66A, dealing with offensive messages sent by computer or communication devices. Step 3: Compare with Section 69A, which still exists and allows blocking of websites, so it was not struck down in the same way. Step 4: Note that Sections 96A and 76A are not the ones commonly associated with the controversy over social media posts. Step 5: Therefore, the correct answer is Section 66A.

Verification / Alternative check:
An easy verification method is to connect the number 66A with online arrests for comments on platforms like Facebook and Twitter. Many news reports and legal summaries focus specifically on 66A. The Supreme Court judgment clearly mentions striking down 66A while upholding certain other provisions. Remembering this pairing helps you quickly eliminate the other options.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Section 96A is not the provision at the center of the major free speech case and is not known for being struck down in this context. Section 69A deals with blocking access to information in certain conditions and remains in force under judicially tested procedures. Section 76A is not popularly connected with the debate on online speech arrests and was not struck down in the landmark free speech judgment.

Common Pitfalls:
A common mistake in exams is to confuse 66A with 69A because both involve online content. The key difference is that 66A criminalised sending offensive messages, while 69A covers blocking of websites and content by the government under specified rules. Memorising this distinction helps avoid confusion in questions on cyber law and freedom of expression.

Final Answer:
The controversial provision that was struck down was Section 66A of the Information Technology Act 2000.