HC-NIC C/WPPIL/191/2015 ORDER [ A.I.R. 1940 Bom. 42], with the further contention that the Bombay High Court judgment is binding on this Court. Similarly the reliance was also made upon a Sikkim High Court decision in Gopalji Prasad Vs State of Sikkim [1981 Cri. LJ 60]. In order to assert that right to free speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution can be used by the mode of Internet use, he relied on recent decision of the Apex Court in case of Shreya Singhal Vs Union of India [(2015) 5 SCC 1] wherein the Supreme Court struck down Section 66-A of the Information Technology Act as putting unreasonable restriction on the right to free speech. The said decision was in different context where vires of Section 66-A was considered by the Apex Court and it was held that the said provision was arbitrary and putting excessive restrictions on the enjoyment of fundamental right to free speech. 15. The Notification issued by the Commissioner of Police, City of Ahmedabad, in the present case was in the background of a specific fact situation which in view of the said competent authority was prone for aggravation leading to public tranquility and public safety and the blocking of internet mobile facility was considered to be an appropriate action. Yet another decision in Ramlila Maidan Incident, In RE [2012 (5) SCC 1] was relied on by learned advocate for the petitioner to vehemently contend that in that case the Supreme Court came down heavily on the authorities for invoking Section 144 of the Page 14 of 15 Page 14 of 15 Created On Thu Sep 17 08:11:45 IST 2015