1. Information Technology Act
Presentation 1

3. While 2000 Act at was for enabling e-Commerce.
2008 Act was focused on Security and Data Protection

4. Related Amendments

8. Sec 66A of the Information Technology Act
"I am ecstatic. It was grossly offensive to our rights, our freedom of speech and expression and today the Supreme Court has upheld that," Shreya told moments after the court scrapped the law, agreeing that it is unconstitutional and violates the rights of citizens.
"Nobody should have fear of putting up something because of the fear of going to prison. The court has upheld the rights of all citizens today," she added.
Here we are talking of section 66A of the Information Technology Act.  This young student of law ( picture source NDTV)  single-handedly own a case before the Supreme Court challenging section 66A of the information Technology Act.
Shreya Shingal Vs. Union of India
Sec 66A of the Information Technology Act

9. “66-A. Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc.
Any person who sends, by means of a computer resource or a communication device,— (a) any information that is grossly offensive or has menacing character; or (b) any information which he knows to be false, but for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred or ill will, persistently by making use of such 2 computer resource or a communication device; or (c) any electronic mail or electronic mail message for the purpose of causing annoyance or inconvenience or to deceive or to mislead the addressee or recipient about the origin of such messages, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.
Explanation.— For the purposes of this section, terms “electronic mail” and “electronic mail message” means a message or information created or transmitted or received on a computer, computer system, computer resource or communication device including attachments in text, image, audio, video and any other electronic record, which may be transmitted with the message.”

10. Supreme Court of India March 24, 2015
Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is struck down in its entirety being violative of Article 19(1)(a) and not saved under Article 19(2).
Supreme Court of India March 24, 2015

11. Some landmark Supreme Court Judgments regarding the Freedom of Expression
Romesh Thapar v. State of Madras, (1950): Freedom of speech and of the press laid at the foundation of all democratic organizations, for without free political discussion no public education, so essential for the proper functioning of the process of popular government, is possible.”
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978):Freedom of speech and expression has no geographical limitation and it carries with it the right of a citizen to gather information and to exchange thought with others not only in India but abroad also.
Prabha Dutt v. Union of India ((1982) :Supreme Court directed the Superintendent of Tihar Jail to allow representatives of a few newspapers to interview Ranga and Billa, the death sentence convicts, as they wanted to be interviewed.
Indian Express v. Union of India (1985):Press plays a very significant role in the democratic machinery. The courts have duty to uphold the freedom of press and invalidate all laws and administrative actions that abridge that freedom.

12. Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting v
Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting v. Cricket Association of Bengal(“Cricket Association”) (1995):Every citizen has a fundamental right to impart as well as receive information through the electronic media. It ruled that frequencies or airwaves are public property, and that the government enjoys no monopoly over broadcasting. Court ordered the government to take immediate steps to set up an independent and autonomous public authority to regulate frequencies. Freedom of speech and expression (Article & 19.2) played an important role in this decision.
Union of India v. Assn. for Democratic Reforms (2002):One-sided information, disinformation, misinformation and non information, all equally create an uninformed citizenry which makes democracy a farce. Freedom of speech and expression includes right to impart and receive information which includes freedom to hold opinions.