In Anuradha Bhasis v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court applied the 'necessity' step of proportionality test to internet shutdowns, requiring that the State adopt the ______ alternative that achieves legitimate aims with least restriction on digital rights.

Answer: least restrictive

Anuradha Bhasis (2020) least restrictive alternative for digital rights: (a) Context: Challenge to internet shutdowns in Jammu & Kashmir following Article 370 abrogation; issue of balancing digital free speech with national security, (b) Proportionality test - necessity step: (i) No less restrictive alternative available: State must adopt least restrictive means to achieve legitimate aim, (ii) Applied to internet shutdowns: Blanket shutdowns rarely least restrictive; targeted restrictions, content blocking, time-bound measures preferred, (iii) Alternatives considered: (a) Targeted restrictions on specific content, platforms vs. blanket shutdown, (b) Time-bound restrictions vs. indefinite shutdown, (c) Content blocking vs. complete internet blackout, (c) Applications: (i) J&K internet shutdown case: Court directed publication of orders, periodic review, time-bound restrictions, (ii) Digital governance: DPDP Act, 2023 requires data minimization, purpose limitation as least restrictive means for data processing, (iii) Algorithmic accountability: Emerging jurisprudence requires least restrictive means for automated decision-making affecting rights, (d) Rationale: (i) Rights protection: Least restrictive alternative ensures core rights protected against unnecessary intrusion, (ii) Democratic legitimacy: Enables state to pursue legitimate aims while minimizing impact on individual rights, (iii) Calibrated balancing: Necessity step ensures restrictions are truly necessary, not merely convenient for state, (e) Illustrates sophisticated judicial review: Proportionality test enables courts to ensure state adopts least restrictive means; protects rights while enabling legitimate state action through calibrated, necessary restrictions.