“If the medicine is bitter, then we can have sugar after it instead of throwing the medicine [away]. People have to take the medicine as it is for their benefit,” Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued.

The story of internet censorship is almost as old as the idea of internet itself. As with any free enterprise, the responsibility needs to be borne by the web user.

Enforcing the same through vaguely worded sections of obsolete laws, however, scars the very notion of liberty and democratic free speech.

The government argues that Section 66 A is a necessary deterrent, lest the free space of the internet be employed to inflame sectarian emotions and disturb public order.

But it has been heavily employed for personal vendettas and political reasons, causing even fair criticism to fall silent.

As the proverbial ball rests in the apex court, we can only hope for a fair judgement, one which would either dispose of the draconian law or at least lend credence and direction to its amendment in line with the 21st century.