Facebook Account Archives

Bom HC | No prima facie case of forcible sexual act; Man accused for rape set free on bail

Bombay High Court: Bharati Dangre, J., granted bail to an accused of rape in light of no prima facie case of non-consensual sexual indulgence.

Applicant has been accused of an offence under Section 376(2)(N) of the Penal Code, 1860.

On 20-03-2020, the applicant was incarcerated and a charge sheet was filed.

Bench observed that the prosecutrix came in touch with the applicant via Facebook. Applicant contacted the prosecutrix on the number she had uploaded on her Facebook Account, thereafter several and frequent telephonic conversations between the duo happened.

Further, the complainant stated that proximity developed between them resulting into a physical relationship.

An FIR was lodged due to some discord between the duo and it has been stated that the said FIR was in immediate response to the discord by the prosecutrix.

Case of the applicant is to the effect that the prosecutrix who was aged 24 years old, maintained a physical relationship with the applicant as they shared a close bond of friendship and she never objected to the said act of physical proximity.

Court on perusal of the facts and circumstances of the case, states that prima facie reading of the complaint does not make out a case of sexual indulgence without the prosecutrix consent or against her will but points out a consensual act.

Therefore, bench granted bail in view of the prima facie case of no forcible sexual act being made out.[Ataullah Fakruddin Ansari v. State of Maharashtra, 2020 SCC OnLine Bom 856, decided on 10-08-2020]

Case Briefs High Courts

Gau HC | Bail denied to a person charged for posting obscene photo of Prime Minister of India on his Facebook account

Gauhati High Court: Ajit Borthakur, J. dismissed bail application of an accused charged with Sections 294 and 500 of Penal Code, 1860 along with Section 67A of Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act).

An FIR was lodged against Md. Karim Khan (accused) under Sections 294 and 500 of the Penal Code, 1860 along with Section 67-A of Information Technology Act, 2000 which laid a provision regarding punishment for publishing or transmitting of material containing sexually explicit act in electronic form. The FIR was lodged alleging Md. Karim of posting an obscene photo of Prime Minister of India on his Facebook wall. Following the FIR, police arrested the accused. This application had been filed by the accused of obtaining bail.

Learned counsels for the petitioner, C.K Nath and S. Saikia, submitted that the accused had been behind the bars for nearly 48 days. Moreover, the accused was illiterate and had vehemently denied his involvement in the alleged offences. Thus, keeping in consideration of his length of detention, the accused prayer for bail was requested to be accepted.

Learned counsel for the respondent N.J Dutta, submitted that the case diary revealed publication of most degraded post in electronic form on the Facebook wall of the accused against the Prime Minister of India and the investigation is yet to be completed. Thus, he requested the Court to dismiss the petition.

The Court observed that on perusal of the case diary, prima facie, incriminating evidence against the accused was revealed and it certainly required further investigations. Therefore, the Court was of the view that if liberty of bail was granted at this stage of investigation, further investigation was likely to be impaired. Thus, the bail application was dismissed.[Md. Karim Khan v. State of Assam, 2019 SCC OnLine Gau 2815, decided on 24-05-2019]

Case Briefs High Courts

Gau HC | Posting of content supporting Pakistan Army on Facebook – held, a serious offence – bail application of accused dismissed

Gauhati High Court: Ajit Borthakur, J. dismissed an application to release the accused-applicant herein on bail in connection with a police case pertaining to uploading of objectionable posts on facebook.

The applicant, Tajul Islam was accused of uploading objectionable posts in support of Pakistan Army from his facebook account. An FIR was filed against him on 02-04-2019 and was sent to custody under Sections 121, 124-A and 505(1)(b) IPC read with Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Counsel for the applicant, S. Huda, submitted that the objectionable post in question was uploaded by one Ukil Uddin from the phone of the accused when he had left it unattended in charging mode at his pharmacy. The accused’s wife had accordingly filed an FIR against Ukil Uddin on 02-04-2019.

The Court scrutinized the case diary and observed that the accused had uploaded his profile photo in his Facebook account with a message “I stand with Pakistan Army”, through his mobile phone. None of the witnesses, whose statements were recorded, implicated Ukil Uddin as the author of the said seditious facebook post.

The Court held that the alleged offences were of very serious nature and if proved would be punishable by life imprisonment and fine. In view thereof, the Court dismissed the bail application and asked the investigating officer to expedite investigation in the case.[Tajul Islam v. State of Assam, Bail Application 957 of 2019, decided on 03-05-2019]

Case Briefs High Courts

Sabarimala| Activist denied anticipatory bail holding her Facebook posts to have the propensity of wounding religious feelings of Ayyappa devotees

Kerala High Court: A Single judge bench comprising of Sunil Thomas, J. dismissed the anticipatory bail plea of activist Rehna Fathima who had last month tried to make an entry into the Sabarimala shrine.

The petitioner was alleged to have deliberately outraged the religious sentiments of Lord Ayyappa devotees by uploading on her Facebook account a picture of Lord Ayyappa with a ribbon drawn across the leg of Lord Ayyappa, which was being cut by a woman using scissors. Along with it, she allegedly posted photograph wearing attire Lord Ayyappa’s devotee and posed in sexually explicit posture. Thereby, a case was registered under Section 295 A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Anticipating arrest, the petitioner moved before the High Court seeking anticipatory bail contending that she believed in the ‘advaita’ system and had observed ‘vruthum’ to visit Sabarimala. She further contended that her attempt to visit the hilltop shrine was out of faith and not to provoke sentiments.

The Court considered screenshots from petitioner’s Facebook account and noted that she had posted a comment that Sabarimala was not a Hindu temple and Lord Ayyappa was not a Hindu. Photographs posted by her did not appear to be in good taste and did not send across any positive message.

It was held that the said posts prima facie appear had a propensity to wound religious feelings of Ayyappa’s devotees. An investigation was required into the fact as to whether petitioner’s posts were deliberately intended to outrage religious feelings of the community. The Court remarked that it was also to be verified whether other persons were involved and whether the posts were made as a part of larger conspiracy.

In view of the above, the bail application was dismissed with a direction to seize the computer used for uploading the posts. [Fathima A.S. v. State of Kerala,2018 SCC OnLine Ker 4928, decided on 16-11-2018]

SCC Blog

Facebook Account

Bom HC | No prima facie case of forcible sexual act; Man accused for rape set free on bail

Gau HC | Bail denied to a person charged for posting obscene photo of Prime Minister of India on his Facebook account

Gau HC | Posting of content supporting Pakistan Army on Facebook – held, a serious offence – bail application of accused dismissed

Sabarimala| Activist denied anticipatory bail holding her Facebook posts to have the propensity of wounding religious feelings of Ayyappa devotees

Popular on scc online blog

Madras HC | If wife issues a cheque to discharge husband’s liability and it gets dishonoured, can the wife be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act? HC answers

Madras HC | Husband and Wife living separately for past 13 years. Can cooling-off period under S. 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 be waived off, if sought mutually ? Read on

Madras HC | Husband and Wife lived separately for 7 long years, marriage dissolved by family court on ‘cruelty’ ground. Read HC’s decision on challenge to Family Court’s decision

De codification of Section 102 CrPC: Can police freeze “bank account & money” during an investigation under Section 102?

All HC | Summons sent to Director for dishonour of cheque under S. 138 NI Act, without prosecution against the Company. Is it permissible? Court answers

MOST COMMENTED

Ker HC | Does a person lose his status as a scheduled caste after converting to a different faith? Does conversion put an end to the disadvantages faced by him? HC answers

AFT | “We don’t agree that there is no stress and strain of service in military stations located in peace areas” Tribunal grants disability pension for hypertension

Chh HC | Power under S. 156(3) of the CrPC warrants application of judicial mind and it has to be supported by an affidavit

Defamation, a tort

Madras HC | If wife issues a cheque to discharge husband’s liability and it gets dishonoured, can the wife be prosecuted under S. 138 NI Act? HC answers

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Popular on scc online blog

MOST COMMENTED