Bengaluru: The Indian state of Karnataka, home to the country's booming technology sector, is facing mounting backlash over a new draft bill that proposes criminal penalties including up to 7 years in prison for spreading fake news online. Titled the Karnataka Misinformation and Fake News (Prohibition) Bill, 2025, the legislation has stirred a fierce debate on the boundaries of free speech, digital rights, and regulatory overreach.
The bill was introduced by Karnataka's ruling government as a response to the growing threat of misinformation on social media and digital platforms. According to the draft, the law aims to curb the spread of fake news, anti-feminist content, superstition, and disrespect to religious symbols, all of which are classified as punishable offenses. Violators could face fines up to ₹10 lakh (around $12,000) and jail terms ranging from one to seven years.
While the state’s IT Minister Priyank Kharge defended the bill as a necessary move to protect citizens from harmful disinformation, legal experts and civil society organizations have expressed alarm. Apar Gupta, Executive Director of the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), described the bill as “dangerously broad,” warning that it gives authorities unchecked powers to target dissent.
“Misinformation is a subjective concept,” Gupta said. “By criminalizing vague terms like 'anti-feminist' or 'superstition,' the law can be weaponized to punish any digital speech the government deems inconvenient.”
Critics argue that the bill lacks clear definitions, leaving its provisions open to interpretation. For example, it does not distinguish between deliberate disinformation and honest mistakes or opinions, which could have a chilling effect on journalists, bloggers, and ordinary citizens expressing views online.
The proposed bill not only penalizes individuals but also places responsibility on social media platforms, websites, and messaging services for failing to prevent the dissemination of false information. This move could create legal confusion, as it may conflict with central government laws such as the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Digital India regulations, leading to jurisdictional clashes.
Opposition leaders and some members within the ruling coalition have questioned the timing and intent of the bill. They accuse the state government of trying to impose digital censorship under the guise of social protection, especially with elections approaching in the state next year.
The Deccan Herald, in a recent editorial, urged lawmakers to remove the criminal penalties altogether. “The bill threatens to do more harm than the problem it seeks to solve. It could turn Karnataka into a surveillance state and erode trust in democratic discourse,” the paper noted.
The government has opened the draft for public comment, inviting feedback from stakeholders including journalists, tech companies, civil rights activists, and citizens. Legal scholars have called on the government to engage with a broad spectrum of experts to refine the bill and bring it in line with international standards for digital regulation.
Karnataka's move comes amid a global reckoning over online misinformation, with governments worldwide grappling with how to regulate digital spaces without infringing on fundamental rights. However, India’s regulatory environment is already facing scrutiny for recent efforts to expand government control over digital content.
If passed in its current form, the Karnataka bill would become one of the most stringent anti-misinformation laws in India, setting a precedent that other states may follow.
The Karnataka Fake News Bill reflects a growing concern over digital misinformation but risks becoming a blunt instrument if not carefully revised. As the public consultation progresses, the state faces a delicate challenge: protecting the public from harmful falsehoods without compromising the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression.
The days ahead will be crucial as voices from the tech industry, civil society, and legal communities weigh in urging the government to strike a responsible balance between security and liberty in the digital age.