The Allahabad High Court on Monday issued a direction to all the District Courts in Uttar Pradesh and to the Director-General of Police, Uttar Pradesh not to lodge FIRs under Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000.
A man booked for putting up a post on his Facebook account, which allegedly disrespected Dr Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar (Baba Saheb Ambedkar), was granted anticipatory bail by the Bombay High Court on a PR bond of Rs 20,000
The apex court began hearing in the plea filed by NGO People's Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), alleging that despite the Court's February, 2019 order, Section 66A of the Information Technology Act continues to be used in police stations as well as in trial courts across the country
In the KS Puttaswamy judgment (August 2017), the Supreme Court recognised privacy as a fundamental right, including privacy of not just body but identity in the digital age.
Despite this Section being struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015 as unconstitutional, the police continues to use it against citizens. This is open disobedience of the apex court.
When Covid was sweeping across India in 2020, the Supreme Court had refused permission to organise the world famous Jagannath Rath Yatra in Puri in view of crowding fears in the pandemic. The man accused in this case put out whatsapp message calling volunteers to attack CJI with shoes.
Are the pleas in courts about the constitutionality of the Act by Twitter an attempt to use social media as a vehicle to herald political change in India? Hopefully, the courts will see through the game.
The money transaction was done by the petitioner through cryptocurrency and Zelle account and to overcome trail of the money, call center employees were paid the salary in cash. The co-accused were taking instructions from the petitioner and were duly reported to him.