Mere Perception Does Not Prove Intention to Spread Hatred: Allahabad High Court

Mere Perception Does Not Prove Intention Spread Hatred

Judiciary Dec 02, 2020 Dev Kumar Patel ( Editor: Ekta Joshi ) 8 Shares

While quashing an FIR under Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 & Section 505 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Allahabad High Court stated that this provision is not meant to be invoked on the basis of sentiments of a weak/sensitive person.

Also Read - UP Police assault on lawyer in Etah: Allahabad High Court Bar Association Writes to Chief Justice for Suo Moto Cognizance of the Incident

The Division Bench of Justice Pankaj Naqvi and Justice Vivek Agarwal was hearing a writ petition filed to quash the FIR lodged by P.S. Badhalganj, Gorakhpur on receiving information from the informant, a “Kshatriya” under section 66 of the IT Act, 2000 & 505 IPC, 1860.

The informant was aggrieved with the publication of a post on the Facebook account of the Manurojan Yadav which he found to be objectionable as the same was posted with a view to spreading disharmony at the instance of Samajwadi Party leaders as also the Chairman of Zila Panchayat.

Also Read - Rejection of Anticipatory Bail Not A Rationale For Questioning Maintainbility of Petition for Quashing Of FIR: Allahabad HC [Read Order]

The screen shot generated by the petitioner on his Facebook account read as “Marwadi Raja Maharana Pratap ko purane itihaskar IT Cell ne Rajpoot Kshatri batakar itihas me maarwadiyo ke sath anyay kiya”

Section 66 of the I.T. Act, 2000 relates to punishment for a computer-related offense which provides that if any person dishonestly or fraudulently does any act referred to in Section 43, he shall be punishable with imprisonment up to 3 years or with a fine which may extend up to Rs.5 lacs

After analyzing section 43 of the IT Act the bench finds that “the overt act attributed to the petitioner does not relate to any of the clauses of Section 43 as the same relates to damage to the computer system”

To relate any connection under Section 505 IPC, the bench relied on judgments of Manzar Sayed Khan vs. the State of Maharashtra and another, (2007) 5 SCC 1 Bhagwati Charan Shukla vs Provincial Govt., AIR 1947 Nag 1, thereafter this bench observed that “words spoken or written must be with the intent to create/promote or likely to create/promote feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will between two factions separated by religion/caste/language/region/communities. Opinion about a historical fact could be a matter of perceptions. Two historians may not be on the same page on a historical event. A discordant view per se would not attract the offense under Section 505(2) IPC as the same would be saved by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution i.e. fundamental right of freedom of speech and expression”.

The bench also noted that mens rea is an important element to attract this provision and the same is lacking.

The bench quashed the FIR stating that “neither any offense under Section 66 of the I.T. Act nor under Section 505(2) IPC is made out”

UP Police assault on lawyer in Etah: Allahabad High Court Bar Association Writes to Chief Justice for Suo Moto Cognizance of the Incident

Legal Insiders Dec 29, 2020 Dev Kumar Patel ( Editor: Ekta Joshi ) 7 Shares

The Allahabad High Court Bar Association has taken a various serious note of incident in Etah, Uttar Pradesh, where police broke open the door, and dragged and pulled an advocate and assaulted him mercilessly wherein the attack on a lawyer in uniform by the Uttar Pradesh Police.The Bar Association of Allahabad has issued letter to the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court and requested him to take "suo motu cognizance of the said incident and pass appropriate orders to maintain the law and...

Read full post

Rejection of Anticipatory Bail Not A Rationale For Questioning Maintainbility of Petition for Quashing Of FIR: Allahabad HC [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court Adv Manish Mishra Adv Anilesh Tewari Adv Desh Deepak Singh

Judiciary Dec 27, 2020 Dev Kumar Patel ( Editor: Ekta Joshi ) 95 Shares

The High Court of Allahabad held that for constituting an offence of abetment of suicide under Section 306 Indian Penal Code, 1860 there must be a proof of direct or indirect act of incitement leading to commission of suicide.The petition was filed by Advocate Desh Deepak Singh, Anilesh Tewari and Manish Mishra before the Allahabad high Court against the impugned F.I.R. lodged under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 and 306 I.P.C., at Police Station, Bakshi Ka Talaab, District Lucknow.Petitioner...

Read full post