2 weeks Ago
1 2 Prayagraj: The Allahabad high court has ruled that liking a social media post is different from sharing it and will not attract Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, which deals with obscene and objectionable material. With this observation, Justice Saurabh Srivastava quashed the case against the applicant, Imran Khan, as the court found that he had merely liked a message published by another person and there was no offensive post in the applicant's Facebook and WhatsApp account. The verdict was delivered on April 17.
Allowing the application filed by Khan, the court ruled that liking a social media post does not amount to publishing or transmitting the post. The provision criminalizes publishing or transmission of material that is "lascivious" or appeals to the "prurient interest" of a person. The court observed that 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 present 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 IT Act ," the court ruled. The court was dealing with an application filed under Section 482 (inherent powers of high court) of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) petition, seeking the quashing of a case against Imran Khan, who had liked a post by one Chaudhari Farhan Usman. Usman's post referred to a protest gathering near the collectorate to hand over a memorandum to the President of India.
Khan was booked for "provocative messages on social media, which resulted in the assembly of about 600-700 people belonging to the Muslim community for arranging procession without permission". According to the police, it caused a serious threat of breach of peace. Besides invoking provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Uttar Pradesh police had also booked the accused under Section 67 of the IT Act.
During the hearing, the applicant's counsel told the court that no such content was found in his Facebook account. However, the police said he had deleted the same but similar content was found on WhatsApp and other social media platforms. From the material on record, the court found that Khan had merely liked a message published by another person.
The court also ruled that Section 67 of the IT Act could not be invoked in respect of provocative material. "Even otherwise, Section 67 of the IT 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 IT Act does not prescribe any punishment for other provocative material," the court said.
.
