Allahabad HC Orders SSP Seeking Explanation on FIR Filed Under Section 66A of IT Act

Must Read

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration,...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be...

Follow us

The High Court of Allahabad summoned the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) of Mathura, seeking an explanation as to how the FIR had been filed under the now unconstitutional Section 66A of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 before the next date of hearing. The present case is Mohan Singh v. State of UP and Ors. with the coram Hon’ble Ramesh Sinha, J. and Hon’ble Raj Beer Singh, J.

Background of the Case 

In the status quo, no person can be arrested for posting any sort of social media posts. This is because Section 66A of the IT Act has been struck down three years ago by the Supreme Court of India. On the contrary, police departments across the nation continue to arrest and detain citizens under this ‘unconstitutional’ section of the said Act. The Allahabad High Court passed an order last week where the SSP of Mathura was called upon to seek an explanation as to why an FIR was filed under this impugned provision.

Mohan Singh (Petitioner) was filed under the sections 66A (Punishment for sending offensive messages through communication service, etc.) and 67B (Punishment for publishing or transmitting of material depicting children in sexually explicit acts, in electronic form) of the IT Act along with sections 294 (Obscene acts and songs), 500 (Punishment for defamation), 504 (Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace), 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation) and 509 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of any woman) of IPC.

Submissions of the Petitioner 

The Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that Mr Singh was charged under the Section 66A of the IT Act along with other sections of the said Act and IPC. 

However, it was decided by the Supreme Court, in  Shreya Singhal V. Union of India 2015 (5) SCC 1, that this particular section was unconstitutional. The provision was struck down citing its conflict with the Freedom of Speech and Expression & Personal Liberty. The petition was thus filed seeking the quashing of the FIR filed under the sections, above stated.

Court’s Decision 

The Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad, Justices Ramesh Sinha and Raj Beer Singh observed that an FIR cannot be filed under Section 66A of the IT (Amendment) Act, 2008.  The Bench followed the precedent set by the Apex Court in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India 2015 (5) SCC 1, where the provision was declared to be ultra vires. 

And it was decided by the court that: 

“…Senior Superintendent of Police, Mathura is directed to file his affidavit explaining as to how the F.I.R. has been registered under section 66A of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 by the next date.”

The next hearing is set to be on August 26th, 2020.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -