The Allahabad High Court while allowing an application said that liking a post will not amount to publishing or transmitting the post, therefore, merely liking a post will not attract Section 67 I.T Act.
A Single Bench of Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal passed this order while hearing an application under section 482 filed by Mohd Imran Kazi.
The application has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 16.12.2019, cognizance order dated 16.3.2020 as well as non-bailable warrant dated 30.6.2023 passed in Case under section 147, 148, 149 I.P.C, Section 67 Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S Mantola, District Agra, pending before the C.J.M, Agra.
The allegation against the applicant was that he posted certain provocative messages on social media, which resulted in the assembly of about 600-700 persons belonging to the Muslim community for arranging procession without permission, which caused a serious threat to breach of peace.
Counsel for the applicant has contended that there is no material against the applicant, and even the report of Cyber Crime Cell, Crime Branch, Agra itself shows that no content was found on the Facebook account of the applicant.
In the counter affidavit, A.G.A has relied on an extract of the case diary in which contents of the cyber cell report have been mentioned. In that part of the case diary, it is mentioned that though there is no content in the Facebook account of the applicant because he has deleted the same, the contents are available on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.
The Court noted that,
The Court, by order dated 11.10.2023, had directed the I.O to remain personally present before the Court along with a report showing any material in the case diary regarding objectionable posts on Whatsapp and other social media.
In pursuance of that order, the I.O, Anuj Kumar, appeared before the Court and placed reliance on the post of one Chaudhari Farhan Usman, which was liked by the applicant, Imran Kazi, in which it was mentioned that they would assemble before the collectorate to hand over the memorandum to the President of India.
The Court observed that,
From perusal of Section 67 of the I.T Act, it is clear that it is punishable only when any person publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form any material which tends to deprave and corrupt persons who read, see or hear aforesaid material/ message contained or embodied.
From the perusal of the provision mentioned above, it is clear that publishing or transmitting obscene material is an offence. A post or message can be said to be published when it is posted, and a post or message can be said to be transmitted when it is shared or retweeted.
In the case, it is alleged that there is material in the case diary showing that the applicant has liked the post of one Farhan Usman for unlawful assembly, but liking a post will not amount to publishing or transmitting the post, therefore, merely liking a post will not attract Section 67 I.T Act.
Even otherwise, from the material on record, it appears that no message which could be provocative in nature is available on record and merely liking a message published by Chaudhari Farhan Usman will not attract penalty u/s 67 of I.T Act or any other criminal offence.
Even otherwise Section 67 of the I.T Act is for obscene material and not for provocative material. The words “lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest” mean relating to sexual interest and desire, therefore, Section 67 I.T Act does not prescribe any punishment for other provocative material.
“Having heard counsel for the applicant and having perused the record, I do not find any material which could connect the applicant with any objectionable post, as there is no offensive post available in the Facebook and Whatsapp accounts of the applicant. Therefore, no case is made out against the applicant”, the Court further while allowing the application.
“In view of the above, so far as the applicant is concerned, the proceeding of Case u/s 147, 148, 149 I.P.C, Section 67 Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, P.S Mantola, District Agra, is hereby quashed”, the Court ordered.