certain  problematic areas or providing 3G/4G internet to certain regions on a trial basis.   7. The learned Attorney General preliminarily contended that Courts should not step into issues of national security which are best left to those in charge of policy making [refer to  Zamora,  (1916) 2 AC 77   (PC)].   Further,   the   learned   Attorney   General   relying   on   some judicial pronouncements submitted that the claims of fundamental rights   have   to   be   examined   against   the   larger   public   interest   of protecting the security of the State, wherein, while balancing the aforesaid   conflicting   rights,   the   security   of   the   nation   should triumph against the fundamental rights of the citizens. Moreover, in   the   prevailing   circumstances   wherein   there   is   continuing insurgency   in   the   region,   the   spreading   of   fake   news   to   incite violence,  etc.,   it   would   not   be   possible   to   provide   full   internet services to the region. 8. Learned   Solicitor   General   vehemently   opposed   the   petitions   and argued   that   the   authorities   have   strictly   complied   with   the directions passed by this Court on the previous occasion, and that the   relevant   authorities   are   cognizant   of   not   only   the   changing circumstances   but   also   the   ground   realities.   The   information 5