1. Does it violate Article 19 (1) of Indian Constitution? As people uses Tik Tok and various other Chinese Apps as a form of expression

   • It does not violate Article 19 (1) of Indian Constitution. As in Article 19(2) it is clearly stated that restrictions can be imposed on Article 19 (1) in interest of Public order, Health and Morality. Various Chinese apps shares the information of individual users with others, it a consideration of Data Privacy. And amid the tense situation of war between India and China, people are also criticising Chinese apps and commodities, so it creates threat to Public order, so it is legal under Article 19(1).
     
     
2. The law should resemble with Article 14 as law should be just, fair and reasonable. Article 14 is available to all citizens and non- citizens and under this all are equal before law but a reasonable classification can be done.
   
   So the question here is that considering Chinese apps different from other apps fits under Reasonable classification definition?
   
   • To fit the banning of Chinese apps under reasonable classification (for example Chinese applications from one perspective and American or all different applications on the other) two conditions needed to be fulfilled. In the first place, there is some comprehensible differentia, or recognizing highlight between the two gatherings. Second, the divergent treatment has a balanced association with the article that it looks to accomplish.
     
     
   • But the reason Chinese apps can be made different from others is data privacy but the question is that complaints related to data privacy were also got from American apps and other apps. So how one can fit Chinese apps under the head of reasonable classification.
     
     
   • So the decision is arbitrary.
     
     

3. Does section 69A of the IT Act empowers government to do this act?

   • If one reviews the legality of Aarogya Setu, courts have seldom been concerned with the lack of particularly enumerated statutory safeguards in restricting essential rights. As long as the notification itself adequately has the pressure of regulation (i.e., it's far contemplated within the present statutory framework) it'd be hard to argue that the Notification banning Chinese language apps was not pondered inside the scope of section 69A. The strategic hobby mentioned inside the Notification that's sought to be performed also can be seemed as valid, mainly within the context of the possibility of outside aggression.

Conclusion
In the last I would like to say government can do it legally under the umbrella of Public order. But this action cannot be said legal if one go by other view, as Chinese apps itself mentions about data sharing in terms and people accepts it to use it. So there are different views. But the action is legal under the umbrella of Public order.