Tag: PUCL

  • No citizen can be prosecuted under scrapped sec 66A of IT Act, says SC 

    By PTI

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Wednesday directed no citizen can be prosecuted under section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which it had scrapped way back in 2015.

    Under the annulled section, a person posting offensive content could be imprisoned for up to three years and also fined.

    Underlining that liberty of thought and expression is of “cardinal” significance, the top court had on March 24, 2015, done away with the provision, saying “the public’s right to know is directly affected by Section 66A of the Information Technology Act”.

    A bench headed by Chief Justice U U Lalit said in all cases where citizens are facing prosecution for alleged violation of section 66-A of the Act, the reference and reliance upon the said provision shall stand deleted.

    “We direct all Director General of Police as well as Home Secretaries of the states and competent officers in Union Territories to instruct the entire police force in their respective states/Union Territories not to register any complaint of crime with respect to alleged violation of section 66A,” said the bench, also comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and S R Bhat.

    The top court clarified that this direction shall apply only with respect to offences punishable under section 66A, and if in the crime in question, other offences are also alleged, then the reference and reliance upon section 66A alone shall be deleted.

    The bench observed the counsel appearing for the Centre has placed on record an all-India status report with regard to pending cases under section 66A.

    It observed the information given in a tabular form does suggest that despite the issue regarding the validity of section 66A of the Act having been decided by the apex court, a number of criminal proceedings still rely upon this provision and citizens are still facing prosecution.

    “Such criminal proceedings, in our view, are directly in the teeth of the directions issued by this court in Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (March 2015 judgement) and consequently, we issue following directions,” the bench said.

    “It needs no reiteration that section 66A of the 2000 Act has been found by this court in Shreya Singhal vs Union of India to be violative of the Constitution and as such, no citizen can be prosecuted in said section 66A,” it said.

    The bench also said whenever any publication, whether government, semi-government and private, about the IT Act is published and section 66A is quoted as part of the statute book, the reader must adequately be informed that section 66A has already been pronounced upon by the apex court to be violative of the Constitution.

    Calling a “matter of serious concern” the registration of FIRs under section 66A of the Act which was scrapped in 2015, the apex court had last month asked the chief secretaries of the states concerned to take back the cases within three weeks.

    The bench was hearing a miscellaneous application of NGO ‘People’s Union for Civil Liberties’ (PUCL) alleging prosecution of people under the scrapped provision.

    The NGO claimed that despite express directions of the court in 2019 that all state governments sensitise police personnel about the March 24, 2015 judgement, thousands of cases have been registered under the section.

    It sought direction to the Centre to collect all data/ information regarding FIRs/investigations where section 66A has been invoked as well as pendency of cases in the courts throughout the country where proceedings under the provision are continuing in violation of the 2015 judgment.

    On February 15, 2019, the top court had directed all state governments to sensitise their police personnel about its March 24, 2015 verdict, which had scrapped section 66A of the Act, so people are not unnecessarily arrested under the struck-down provision.

    The first PIL on the issue was filed in 2012 by law student Shreya Singhal who sought an amendment to section 66A of the Act after two girls – Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan – were arrested in Palghar in Maharashtra’s Thane district.

    While one had posted a comment against the shutdown in Mumbai following Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray’s death, the other had ‘liked’ it.

    PUCL was also one of the petitioners in the earlier case and had challenged the constitutional validity of Section 66A of the Act.

    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Wednesday directed no citizen can be prosecuted under section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which it had scrapped way back in 2015.

    Under the annulled section, a person posting offensive content could be imprisoned for up to three years and also fined.

    Underlining that liberty of thought and expression is of “cardinal” significance, the top court had on March 24, 2015, done away with the provision, saying “the public’s right to know is directly affected by Section 66A of the Information Technology Act”.

    A bench headed by Chief Justice U U Lalit said in all cases where citizens are facing prosecution for alleged violation of section 66-A of the Act, the reference and reliance upon the said provision shall stand deleted.

    “We direct all Director General of Police as well as Home Secretaries of the states and competent officers in Union Territories to instruct the entire police force in their respective states/Union Territories not to register any complaint of crime with respect to alleged violation of section 66A,” said the bench, also comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and S R Bhat.

    The top court clarified that this direction shall apply only with respect to offences punishable under section 66A, and if in the crime in question, other offences are also alleged, then the reference and reliance upon section 66A alone shall be deleted.

    The bench observed the counsel appearing for the Centre has placed on record an all-India status report with regard to pending cases under section 66A.

    It observed the information given in a tabular form does suggest that despite the issue regarding the validity of section 66A of the Act having been decided by the apex court, a number of criminal proceedings still rely upon this provision and citizens are still facing prosecution.

    “Such criminal proceedings, in our view, are directly in the teeth of the directions issued by this court in Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (March 2015 judgement) and consequently, we issue following directions,” the bench said.

    “It needs no reiteration that section 66A of the 2000 Act has been found by this court in Shreya Singhal vs Union of India to be violative of the Constitution and as such, no citizen can be prosecuted in said section 66A,” it said.

    The bench also said whenever any publication, whether government, semi-government and private, about the IT Act is published and section 66A is quoted as part of the statute book, the reader must adequately be informed that section 66A has already been pronounced upon by the apex court to be violative of the Constitution.

    Calling a “matter of serious concern” the registration of FIRs under section 66A of the Act which was scrapped in 2015, the apex court had last month asked the chief secretaries of the states concerned to take back the cases within three weeks.

    The bench was hearing a miscellaneous application of NGO ‘People’s Union for Civil Liberties’ (PUCL) alleging prosecution of people under the scrapped provision.

    The NGO claimed that despite express directions of the court in 2019 that all state governments sensitise police personnel about the March 24, 2015 judgement, thousands of cases have been registered under the section.

    It sought direction to the Centre to collect all data/ information regarding FIRs/investigations where section 66A has been invoked as well as pendency of cases in the courts throughout the country where proceedings under the provision are continuing in violation of the 2015 judgment.

    On February 15, 2019, the top court had directed all state governments to sensitise their police personnel about its March 24, 2015 verdict, which had scrapped section 66A of the Act, so people are not unnecessarily arrested under the struck-down provision.

    The first PIL on the issue was filed in 2012 by law student Shreya Singhal who sought an amendment to section 66A of the Act after two girls – Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Shrinivasan – were arrested in Palghar in Maharashtra’s Thane district.

    While one had posted a comment against the shutdown in Mumbai following Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray’s death, the other had ‘liked’ it.

    PUCL was also one of the petitioners in the earlier case and had challenged the constitutional validity of Section 66A of the Act.

  • Places of Christian worship continue to come under attack in Karnataka even as assembly passes anti-conversion bill

    By Online Desk

    CHENNAI: Places of Christian worship continue to come under attack in Dakshina Kannada and other parts of BJP-ruled Karnataka. In a fresh incident on Thursday morning, a 160-year-old St Joseph’s church was attacked and the statue of St Antony disfigured in Chikkaballapur district, said sources.

    More than a week ago, a pro-Hindu mob burnt Christian religious books in Hanumanapalaya in Srinivasapur in the Kolar district alleging they were being distributed among the local people by the Christian community.

    In Hubballi sometime ago, a mob entered a church and shouted slogans and chanted Hindu religious songs. Surprisingly, the pastor who lodged a complaint with the police was arrested under charges of “outraging the religious feelings of any class,” the BBC reports.

    A report by the Evangelical Fellowship of India (EFI) listed 39 cases of threats or violence against Christians from January to November this year in Karnataka, the BBC report further said adding, these include alleged attacks on pastors by members of right-wing Hindu groups and even instances where they reportedly physically prevented them from holding religious services. 

    The attacks come amid protests by civil society organisations against the Karnataka Protection of Right to Freedom Bill 2021 tabled by the government in the ongoing assembly session.

    President of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) Prof Y J Rajendra reportedly said that the bill is against Article 25 of the Constitution and is trampling upon the constitutionally guaranteed rights to freedom of religion, privacy, and dignity.

    The bill, among other things, would empower the state to deem interfaith marriages involving conversion as “null & void.” The government, aided by the bill, intends to prohibit conversion by “misrepresentation, force, allurement, fraudulent means, or marriage.”

    The Bill reportedly proposes a maximum punishment of 10 years of imprisonment for forcible conversion of persons from Dalit and ST communities, minors, and women to another religion. 

    Similar laws are reportedly in force in Arunachal Pradesh, Odisha, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, and Uttarakhand.

  • Tripura police serves notices to 102 persons under UAPA, sends notices to Twitter, FB and YouTube

    By PTI

    AGARTALA: Tripura police on Saturday booked 102 social media account holders under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), criminal conspiracy and forgery charges and served notices to the authorities of Twitter, Facebook and YouTube to freeze their accounts and inform all particulars of those persons to it, a senior police official said.

    This comes on the heels of Tripura Police registering a case against four Supreme Court lawyers under the stringent act and various sections of the IPC for allegedly promoting communal disharmony with their social media posts on the recent violence targeting Muslims, a senior official said on Friday.

    Tripura police on Saturday served notices to the Twitter headquarters in San Francisco, USA, by the officer-in-charge of West Agartala police station asking its authority to freeze the accounts of the accused immediately for spreading objectionable news.

    “Some persons/organization are publishing/posting distorted and objectionable news items/statements in Twitter regarding the recent clash and alleged attack upon mosques of Muslim communities in the state. In publishing these news items/posts, the persons/organizations have been found using photographs/videos of some other incidents, fabricated statements/commentary for promoting enmity between religious groups/ communities in presence of a criminal conspiracy. The posts have the potential to flare up communal tension in Tripura state between people of different religious communities, which may result into communal riots”” the notice served to the authorities of Facebook, Twitter and YouTube said.

    The cases against the social media account holders were registered at the same West Agartala police station under IPC sections 153A (promoting disharmony or feelings of enemity), 153 B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration), 469 (forgery), 471 (fraudulently or dishonestly using as genuine a forged document), 503 (threatening), 504 (intentional insult) and section 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 13 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), he said.

    Similar notices were sent to Facebook and YouTube authorities as well, police said.

    “All the 102 persons, against whom the notices were served were asked to appear before the police and clarify their position”, the official said.

    The names of the persons who have been charged were not disclosed by police.

    The superintendent of police of West Tripura district Manik Das had said that a group of Supreme Court lawyers visited Tripura on Tuesday last and after their visit, it was noticed that several posts were made in social media expressing their discontent regarding recent communal incidents.

    “Police has registered a case and wants to know if the posts were made by them or those were fake posts,” he said.

    The lawyers were alleged to have claimed that the Muslim community was targeted, including women, and a mosque was vandalised.

    The team had demanded appropriate police action against the attackers, those who spread rumours and officials who remained inactive during attacks that occurred in the aftermath of violence against Hindus in Bangladesh during Durga Puja this year.

    The case against the four SC lawyers was registered at West Agartala police station on November 3 under various sections of IPC including 153 (a) and (b) related to promoting disharmony, enmity or feelings of hatred between different groups on the grounds of religion, race etc, 469, 504, 120 (b) (criminal conspiracy), besides section 13 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.

    If convicted under the tough UAPA, an offender may face imprisonment up to seven years.

    The lawyers belong to different organisations including Lawyers for Democracy, the National Confederation of Human Rights Organization (NCHRO) and the PUCL.

    Notices were served to Estesham Hashmi, Supreme Court lawyer, advocate Amit Srivastav, coodinator of Lawyers for Democracy, NCHRO national secretary Ansar Indori and PUCL member Mukesh Kumar.

    In the notice to the lawyers, the police had asked them to delete the social media posts and appear before the investigators by November 10.

    A mosque was vandalised and two shops were set ablaze at Chamtilla during the October 26 Vishva Hindu Parishad rally, which was called to protest against the communal violence in neighbouring Bangladesh.

    Three houses and a few shops, reportedly owned by Muslims, were also ransacked in nearby Rowa Bazar, the police said.

    The state government had on October 29 alleged that a group from outside with vested interests had hatched a conspiracy against the administration to create unrest in Tripura and malign its image by uploading fake photographs of a burning mosque on social media after the October 26 incident.

  • SC sends notice to states, UTs and HCs on people being charged under scrapped section 66A of IT Act

    By PTI
    NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to states, Union Territories and registrar general of all high courts on the plea of an NGO that people are still being booked under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act that was scrapped by an apex court verdict in 2015.

    A bench of Justices RF Nariman and BR Gavai said that since police is a state subject, it will be better that all the state governments and Union Territories are made party and “we can pass a comprehensive order so that the matter is settled for once and for all”.

    Senior advocate Sanjay Parikh, appearing for NGO PUCL, said that there are two aspects in this matter, one is police and the other is judiciary where such cases are still being tried. The bench said that as far as the judiciary is concerned it can take care of that and will issue notice to all the high courts.

    The top court listed the matter for further hearing after four weeks. On July 5, the top court had said it is “amazing” and “shocking” that people are still being booked under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act that was scrapped by an apex court verdict in 2015.

    Under the scrapped section, a person posting offensive messages could be imprisoned for up to three years and also fined.