Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a man booked under the Indian Penal Code and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, merely for ‘liking’ a social media post that allegedly incited an unlawful assembly.
Justice Saurabh Srivastava delivered the judgment in an application filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking to quash the criminal case against the applicant.
The court addressed an application filed by Imran Khan, challenging the charge sheet dated 06.04.2021 and the cognizance order dated 07.02.2022 in Criminal Case No. 2961 of 2022. It was alleged that the applicant had posted provocative messages on social media, resulting in the unlawful assembly of about 600–700 persons from the Muslim community for a procession without permission.
In its key determination, the court held:
“Liking a post will not amount to publishing or transmitting the post. Therefore, merely liking a post will not attract Section 67 of the IT Act. Even otherwise, from the material on record, it appears that no provocative message is available on record.”
The court carefully examined Section 67 of the IT Act and stated:
“From a perusal of Section 67 of the IT Act, it is clear that punishment is attracted only when a person publishes, transmits, or causes to be published or transmitted in electronic form any material that tends to deprave and corrupt those who read, see, or hear such material.”
The court further clarified:
“A post or message can be said to be ‘published’ when it is posted, and ‘transmitted’ when it is shared or retweeted,” distinguishing these actions from merely liking a post.
The judgment also emphasized that:
“Section 67 of the IT Act deals with obscene material, not provocative content. The words ‘lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest’ refer to sexual interest or desire. Therefore, Section 67 does not cover provocative material.”
While noting the absence of a direct judgment on whether liking a post constitutes an offence, the court referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Kaushal Kishor v. State of U.P. [(2023) 4 SCC 1], which emphasized the need for citizens to exercise restraint in speech and to use their freedom of expression responsibly under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
The court found no evidence linking the applicant to any objectionable post, and the Cyber Crime Cell report confirmed no offensive content on his social media accounts.
In conclusion, the court quashed the proceedings against Imran Khan, while clarifying that the lower court is free to proceed against the other co-accused if no legal impediment exists.
Case Title: Imran Khan vs. State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant: Mr. Abhishek Ankur Chaurasia and Mr. Diwan Saifullah Khan
Counsel for State: Government Advocate
!["No Loudspeakers For Azan, No Fundamental Right To Create Noise," Says Allahabad HC To Two Mosques [Read Judgment]](/secure/uploads/2020/01/lj_4995_Allahabad_HC_AZAN.jpg)
