Karnataka High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Karnataka High Court (Dharwad Bench): Suraj Govindaraj, J. while deciding a matter regarding handcuffing of an accused during arrest, held that “handcuffing should be by way of last resort and such handcuffing should mainly be only for the reason of whether there is a possibility of the accused and/or under trial prisoner escaping custody, causing harm to himself or causing harm to others.

Some disputes had arisen between a law student studying in Shikshan Prasrak Mandals Law College at Raibag (‘the petitioner’) and Babu Annappa regarding a mortgage deed executed in respect of agricultural lands belonging to the petitioner. Due to this, five criminal cases were filed against the petitioner for offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on account of dishonour of cheques issued in pursuance of the said mortgage. Pursuant to this, the petitioner was arrested by the Respondent 3- Police Sub-Inspector, Ankali Police Station after a non-bailable warrant was issued Thereafter, he was allegedly paraded with handcuffs in Ankali Town and later on was taken in a bus in handcuffs from Ankali to Chikodi Police Station, without being produced before the Court.

Later on, the petitioner’s bail application was rejected, and he was remanded to judicial custody. He appealed the order of conviction which was thereby stayed The petitioner alleged that despite the conviction being stayed, he was repeatedly harassed by the police as they would illegally arrest or detain him, visit his house, and threaten him. Thus, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking relief in nature of compensation under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, for the damage caused to his life and reputation due to illegal detention and illegal handcuffing even prior to the petitioner being proven guilty.

Issues framed by the Court:

1. Whether the accused who is arrested can be handcuffed? If so, under what circumstances?

2. If there is any violation by the Arresting Officer, would the accused be eligible for compensation?

3. On what basis is the compensation required to be determined and paid?

4. Whether the accused suffered damage to his life and reputation or not? If yes, then what amount of compensation should be awarded?

Relevant Statutory Provisions regarding Arrest and Handcuffing

A perusal of Section 46 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ‘CrPC’ indicates that a person can be arrested by touching or confining the body of the person to be arrested, unless there is a submission to custody by word or action. It is only when there is a resistance to the arrest or evasion of arrest that the Police Officer may use all means necessary to effect the arrest.

Section 49 CrPC indicates that a person arrested shall not be subjected to more restraint than is necessary to prevent his escape. Therefore, it is the requirement of law that the restraint has to be reasonable and only to the extent that the person does not escape from custody.

Section 220 of Penal Code, 1860 ‘IPC’ indicates that if a person who has legal authority to confine a person, confines such a person contrary to law, he shall be punishable with imprisonment, which may extend to seven years or with fine or with both.

Sections 831, 832, 833, 834 and 835 of the Karnataka Police Manual provide for instructions for using handcuffs. A perusal of the said provisions would indicate that the prisoner should not be normally handcuffed, unless he is violent or disorderly or circumstances necessitate such handcuffing. In the event of an accused is handcuffed, the facts and reasons for it is required to be recorded in the Station House Dairy.

Analysis and Findings:

Reliance was placed on Prem Shankar Shukla v. Delhi Administration, (1980) 3 SCC 526 and Antonio Sebastiao Mervyn Degbertde Piedade Pacheco v. State of Goa 2008 (6) AIR Bom R 585 and observed that normally during arrest an accused cannot be handcuffed. Only under extreme or exceptional circumstances, such as violent tendencies or the possibility of escape, can an accused be handcuffed. Furthermore, there are some requirements to be fulfilled by the authorities in such a case:

  • When an accused is handcuffed, the Arresting Officer is required to record the reasons for handcuffing, which would have to sustain the scrutiny of the Court.

  • Whenever an accused is produced before the Court of law, it would be required of the Court to enquire if the accused had been handcuffed or not and if handcuffed, to ascertain the reasons recorded by the Arresting Officer on the justifiability on the same.

Thus, the court held that “handcuffing should be by way of last resort and such handcuffing should mainly be only for the reason of whether there is a possibility of the accused and/or under trial prisoner escaping custody, causing harm to himself or causing harm to others. The nature of offences and the punishment prescribed for the said offence are not relevant for the matter of handcuffing.

Dealing with the issue regarding compensation, reliance was placed on D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416 and Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993) 2 SCC 746 and observed that “if there is a violation by the Arresting officer in putting handcuffs on the petitioner, the petitioner would be eligible for compensation”. Thus, in the present case, the State is responsible for compensating the petitioner and the amount of damage is to be calculated on the basis of any evidence and documents produced by the petitioner.

Regarding the third issue, the court held that there are a few considerations that have to be made while awarding the compensation, these considerations are as follows:

  • The court should take into consideration the loss/damage that might have been caused to the person who has been handcuffed.

  • The court should also consider the imposition of compensation as a deterrent to the Police Officers who do not discharge their duties in a proper manner and/or violate the applicable law. Additionally, although the State would be required to pay the compensation, the State would be at liberty to recover the same from the concerned defaulter(s).

Thus, the court observed that “Compensation which is required to be paid as aforesaid being a Public Law Remedy, there cannot be a straitjacket formula which could determine the amount of compensation that has to be paid. Be that as it may. The compensation which is required to be paid is by applying the principles of strict liability.

Lastly, the court held that the evidence provided by the petitioner does not sufficiently prove that the petitioner was paraded in handcuffs and his reputation has been as immensely damaged as he claims. Thus, for the procedural irregularity of handcuffing, the petitioner was awarded Rs. 2 lakhs as compensation as opposed to Rs 25 lakhs which was originally demanded.

[Suprit Ishwar Divate v. State of Karnataka, 2022 SCC OnLine Kar 1133 decided on 10-06-2022]

Advocates who appeared in this case :

Santosh P. Pujari, Advocate, for the Petitioner;

Praveen K. Uppar, Advocate, for the Respondent.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Allahabad High Court: In an alleged sexual assault case, Samit Gopal, J., noted that allegations of sexual assault were against a practicing lawyer by a junior in his office.

Instant bail application was filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in connection with a case under Sections 366, 376, 354-A, 328, 323, 504, 506 of Penal Code, 1860.

An FIR was lodged under Section 366 IPC against the applicant and Sipahi Lal Shukla in connection with an incident, wherein it was alleged that the first informant’s daughter aged about 20 years who was an LL.B student and was practising in the High Court with the present applicant who was an Advocate in the High Court.

It was stated that on the day of occurrence from near Alia Law Agency, both the accused persons enticed away his daughter.

Analysis and Decision

It was evident that the applicant was named in the FIR, in the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC.

The name of the applicant and the role assigned to him was consistent throughout. The allegations were of sexual assault and physical assault upon the prosecutrix which had continued for a substantial long period.

Further, it was stated that the prosecutrix was junior in the office of the applicant and allegations were against a person practicing law and was a person in uniform involved in the noble profession.

“The office of a lawyer is not less respected than Courts of law.”

The act as complained of by the prosecutrix against the applicant was told by her in detail in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC.

Bench also stated that,

The investigation for other accused persons is pending and the apprehension of learned counsels for the State and of the panel lawyer of High Court Legal Service Committee of the applicant being in a position to influence the investigation and tamper with the evidence cannot be ruled out at this stage.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the bail application was rejected.

Lastly, the High Court vide an order directed the District and Sessions Judge, Prayagraj to send the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 CrPC from the Court concerned.

The compliance of the order had been done and a sealed envelope was received, and it was opened on the directions of the Court during the arguments and after the conclusion, the Court directed the Bench Secretary of this Court to seal the same. The Registrar General was directed to remit back the sealed envelope to the District and Sessions Judge, Prayagraj. [Rajkaran Patel v. State of U.P., Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48511 of 2021, decided on 26-5-2022]

Advocates before the Court:

Counsel for Applicant:- Rajiv Lochan Shukla, Ravikant Shukla

 Counsel for Opposite Party:- G.A., Sukhvir Singh

New releasesNews

Table of Contents

Editorial………………………………………………………………………………… IX

Advertising in the Era of Social Media Influencers:
A Socio-Legal Analysis of the Indian Digital Landscape

Farah Hayat…………………………………………………………………….. 1

Evaluating Privacy Violations of Facial Recognition Technology in the Backdrop of OECD Privacy Principles

Prerna Sengupta and Riddhi Bang………………………………………….. 22

Privacy, National Security, And Government Interests: The Many Facets of End-to-End Encryption in India

Aditi Singh and Ujjwal Agarwal…………………………………………….. 46

The Crime of Being Obscenely Private on the Internet: Section 67 and 67A of the IT Act, 2000

Mani Munjal and Anuj Nakade……………………………………………… 64


Soumya Manugonda comes from Penugonda village in Telangana. She is visually impaired by birth and has completed her schooling till 10th standard from the Devnar School for the Blind, Hyderabad. She completed the studies for the 11th and 12th standard from the Sai Junior College for Visually Challenged, Hyderabad. She is a very bright student and scored 8 CGPA in tenth standard and 82% in twelfth standard in Telangana State Board. She has had very humble beginnings – her parents are farmers and she has just one younger brother.

Soumya got to know about IDIA three years ago when she was in the eleventh standard, and since then she has been preparing for the law entrance exam under the guidance of IDIA Hyderabad team. Throughout the two years of her preparation she faced many hurdles ranging from family issues, economic challenges, network issues when she went back to her village, etc. However, Soumya never lost hope and finally emerged victorious.

There were weeks when she could not study due to lack of internet and other facilities but she made sure that whatever opportunities she got, she made good use of. This particular quote by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross would sum up what Soumya has endured during this journey-

The most beautiful people we have known are those who have known defeat, known suffering, known struggle, known loss, and have found their way out of the depths. These persons have an appreciation, a sensitivity, and an understanding of life that fills them with compassion, gentleness, and a deep loving concern. Beautiful people do not just happen.

Our volunteers have witnessed Soumya’s growth as a deeply compassionate human being full of positivity and hope. She never once gave up. Soumya is very motivated to make a career in law and aspires to be a successful corporate lawyer one day.

She credits her success to her family, especially her mother, the IDIA team for constant guidance and her lovely teachers at Devnar and Sai Junior who made sure that she had all the facilities to concentrate on her studies.

About IDIA:

IDIA is a pan-India movement to train underprivileged students and help transform them into leading lawyers and community advocates. IDIA is premised on the notion that access to premier legal education empowers marginalized communities and helps them help themselves. IDIA selects and trains students from underprivileged backgrounds (IDIA Trainees) to crack top law entrance examinations in India. Once they are admitted to top law colleges, it provides a scholarship to these students (IDIA Scholars) that comprises financial support, training and mentorship among other things.

Read more about IDIA here: https://www.idialaw.org/

Get in touch with them here: info@idialaw.org

SCC Online is now on Telegram and Instagram. Join our channel @scconline on Telegram and @scconline_ on Instagram and stay updated with the latest legal news from within and outside India

Read more such stories here:

IDIA Stories

Hot Off The PressNews

Days after the Chief Justice of India, Justice S.A. Bobde objected to a Law student (appearing party-in-person before the Supreme Court) using the expression “Your Honour” for addressing the Court, the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra, has issued the following clarification:

A matter which was listed before the Supreme Court of India, the Chief Justice of India has been stated to be taking objection to the term “Your Honor” being used by a Law Student who was appearing as a party in person as per practice of the Superior Courts of India.

Bar Council of India with regard to the above matter clarified that as far as back on 28-09-2019 on the request made by Office-Bearers of Bar Association of some High Courts with regard to the Advocates addressing the Court, it was resolved that as per mostly preferred and prevalent practice, lawyers of the country be requested to address the Judges of various High Courts and Supreme Court as “My Lord” or “Your Lordships” or “Hon’ble Court” while Lawyers of Subordinate Courts, Tribunals and other Forums may address the Court as “Your Honor” or “Sir” or the equivalent word in respective regional languages.

The said resolution was taken by the Council in order to maintain graciousness and to uphold the majesty (i.e. impressive beauty) of the Courts of the country.

Bar Council of India

[Press Release dt. 23-02-2021]

Case BriefsDistrict Court

State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Odisha (SCDRC): Dr D.P. Choudhury (President) modified the compensation amount awarded to a Law Student in light of being subjected to ‘Deficiency of Service’ and ‘Unfair Trade by ‘Amazon’.

The instant appeal was filed under Section 15 of the erstwhile Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Factual Matrix

While the appellant was in his first year of law school, the OP had floated an offer for sale of a Laptop without Laptop Bag for Rs 190 against the price of Rs 23,499.

OP had confirmed for placing of the order and two hours after receiving the confirmation, the appellant received a phone call from the OP’s Customer Care Service Department stating that the subject order stood cancelled due to the price recession issue.

Since the complainant was in need of a laptop to prepare his project, he raised an objection for such cancellation.

On not receiving any response from the OP, complainant issued a legal notice.

Deficiency in Service

Appellant had to purchase another laptop but suffered from mental agony for such cancellation, hence filed a complaint alleging the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

Complainant claimed compensation of Rs 50,000 and Rs. 10,000 towards litigation cost.

District Forum had allowed the complaint partly by directing the OP to pay compensation of Rs 10,000 for mental agony and to pay Rs 2,000 towards the cost of litigation.

Hence, the aforesaid impugned order was challenged by the complainant/appellant stating that the District Forum committed error in law by not deciding to direct to pay Rs 50,000 as compensation.

Analysis, Decision and Law

Bench observed that “When there is an advertisement made for offer placed by the OP and made the offer as per the material available on record and complainant placed the order and same got confirmed, the agreement is complete.”

Another aspect to be noted was that, when the OP had allowed Rockery Marketing at his platform as per written version, the responsibility of the OP could not be lost sight of.

Since there was a breach of contract by OP, OP is held to be liable to pay the damages.

Commission agreed with District Forum’s observation that OP not only negligent in providing service but was also involved in unfair trade practice.

Taking all the factors discussed above for consideration, Bench concluded that compensation awarded should be of Rs 30,000 for unfair trade practice and punitive damages of Rs 10,000. Further, with regard to the cost of litigation Rs 5000 needs to be awarded.

On failing to make the above payments to the complainant within 30 days, the said amounts will carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

In view of the above, the appeal was disposed of. [Supriyo Ranjan Mahapatra v. Amazon Development Centre India (P) Ltd., First Appeal No. 492 of 2018, decided on 11-01-2021]

Read More:

District Consumer Forum directs ‘Amazon’ to pay compensation for “deficiency in services”

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of UU Lalit, Vineet Saran and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ has held that no person is entitled to a copy of statement recorded under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 till the appropriate orders are passed by the court after the charge-sheet is filed.

“The right to receive a copy of such statement will arise only after cognizance is taken and at the stage contemplated by Sections 207 and 208 of the Code and not before.”


The Court was hearing the case where

  • the father of the Appellant lodged a Complaint that he had seen a video of the Appellant on her Facebook account alleging that Swami Chinmayanand and some others had sexually exploited the Appellant and many other girls; that the Appellant was not contactable; that he was apprehending danger to the Appellant; and that prompt action be taken in the matter.
  • The said Facebook video having gone viral, letters were written to the Supreme Court by some advocates whereafter Suo Motu Writ Petition was registered. On 30.08.2019 it was reported that the Appellant was found in District Dausa of State of Rajasthan whereafter the Supreme Court recorded the statement of the Appellant that she did not intend to go back to Uttar Pradesh but would meet her parents in Delhi. Certain directions were therefore passed.
  • In its Order dated 02.09.2019, this Court directed the Chief Secretary, State of Uttar Pradesh, to constitute a Special Team to enquire into the grievances expressed by Miss “A” and insofar as the apprehension expressed by the parents of Miss “A”. It also directed the Chief Secretary, State of Uttar Pradesh, to direct the Superintendent of Police of the concerned district, namely, Shahjahanpur, to afford protection to the parents and family members of the girl on assessing the threat perception.
  • On 20.09.2019, Swamy Chinmayanand was arrested and his application for bail was rejected by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahjahanpur on 23.09.2019.
  • In November 2019, the High Court directed that trial court to provide a certified copy of the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. to the applicant subject to payment of usual charges.
  • Before the Appellant could challenge the decision of the High Court, by filing the instant Special Leave Petition on 13.11.2019, a copy of her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code was made over to the accused.


The Supreme Court noticed that the High Court completely erred in appreciating the directions issued by this Court, especially in a matter where the offences alleged against accused are of sexual exploitation.

“In such matters utmost confidentiality is required to be maintained. In our view, the High Court completely failed in that behalf.”

Explaining the Scheme of the relevant provisions of CrPC, the Court said that after the conclusion of the investigation, an appropriate report under Section 173 of the Code is to be filed by the police giving information as required by Section 173.

In terms of Section 190 of the Code, the concerned Magistrate may take cognizance of any offence inter alia upon a police report. At the stage of exercise of power under Section 190 of the Code, the Magistrate may deem fit that the matter requires further investigation on certain aspects/issues and may pass appropriate direction. It is only after taking of the cognizance and issuance of process that the accused is entitled, in terms of Sections 207 and 208 of the Code, to copies of the documents referred to in said provisions.

The filing of the charge-sheet by itself, does not entitle an accused to copies of any of the relevant documents including statement under Section 164 of the Code, unless the stages indicated above are undertaken. Thus, merely because the charge-sheet was filed by the time the High Court had passed the order in the present matter, did not entitle the accused to a copy of the statement under Section 164 of the Code.

Though, a copy of the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code was made over to the accused, the Court set aside the order passed by the High Court and held that

“… under no circumstances copies of statements recorded under Section 164 of the Code can be furnished till appropriate orders are passed by the Court after taking cognizance in the matter.”

[Miss ‘A’ v. State of Uttar Pradesh,  2020 SCC OnLine SC 817, decided on 08.10.2020]


Vaibhavi is a first-year B.A. LL.B (Hons.) student at Gujarat National Law University, who’s raring to show the world what she can do!

Vaibhavi’s Story in her own words

Hello. My name is Vaibhavi Rajendra Pedhavi. I belong to Nandaipada, a small village in the small town of Alibag, which is located in the coastal region of Maharashtra. Alibag is also known as mini Goa for its beauty and clean beaches. My father owns a small electronics store and he also does farming to help the family. My mother is a housewife. My parents were determined to teach their daughters well, no matter how much trouble they would face. Since childhood, I used to read storybooks on great leaders. When I came to know that Lokamanya Tilak, Mahatma Gandhi and many of the leaders were lawyers, I saw law as a profession with great respect. When I was in school, I used to read a lot of Marathi books. I was also interested in classical music. I represented my school in many elocution competitions as well.

I also loved to read newspapers during my school years. Since newspapers were not available at my home, I used to go to my uncle’s house to read them. By reading books and newspapers, I was gradually becoming aware of the wrongs in society. As well as I understood the gap between urban and rural areas. The concepts of ‘India’ and ‘Bharat’ were completely different from one another. In my village, people are struggling for one meal in a day and on the other hand tourists who used to come to visit and enjoy at Alibag used to waste a lot of food even without thinking. These factors motivated me to work towards positive social changes in society.

Incident that triggered her to pursue Law

When I was in tenth grade, an event happened which completely changed my life. As we are Kolis (fishermen), our main occupation has been fishing since a long time. Even my great-grandfather, grandfather and still my many relatives are doing this business for their livelihood. My uncle was also a fisherman. Yes, I am saying ‘was’. In 2016, a tragic accident happened in a boat and he died on the spot on the boat. His son was only 7 years old at that time and suddenly all the responsibilities of his son came to my aunt.

Since no one in our family was aware of the government procedures in such circumstances, we could not approach anywhere. And at this moment I realized the importance of law and of a good education. After scoring good marks in class 10, I decided to study for law entrance examination. I decided to go to Pune as there were more opportunities there and I could learn a lot of things there. Initially, my parents were opposed to my decision because they could not afford my hostel fees and other expenses. But after seeing my sincere desire they managed my fees from somewhere and that decision really changed my life and became the turning point.

The culture was really different there and I had never studied using computers in my whole life before. People used to talk to each other in English. Sometimes I really wondered, how were they able to talk in English! Our village school was totally different from Pune’s college.

Role of IDIA in Vaibhavi’s life

One day, IDIA Pune Chapter conducted a sensitization program in our college. They introduced us to many opportunities available after pursuing law and they conducted an exam through which they were going to select some students who were really interested in law as a career and they were going to sponsor the educational expenses. As I was really interested in law from the beginning, I performed well in the preliminary test and after an interview, I was selected as an IDIA trainee.

All volunteers from the IDIA team really supported me throughout the year. They took my personal classes every day (apart from Career Launcher classes) and they also conducted mock tests every month. As I had difficulty in understanding legal knowledge in English,  Atharv Dada from IDIA used to explain to me in Marathi. He even made a timetable for my daily work. Liji didi, Apoorva didi, Soumyashree didi, Madhura didi and all volunteers really explained to me each and every topic of the syllabus. I really think that I am here only because of these people. I cannot imagine what would have happened without them.

When my CLAT results were declared, I did not even know whether my results were bad or good! But finally, Soumyashree Didi called me and said, “Congratulations, Vaibhavi!” I asked her “Marks thik hain kya?” Are my marks okay?, and she said, “Yes”! And I felt really very happy because my dream was coming true. I got enrolled in GNLU soon thereafter.

Aim: ‘A Ray of Hope’ for Villagers

The journey of these 5 years has just begun. The journey will give me the most memorable 5 years of my life. These years will teach me many new things, both good and bad. But the final decision will be mine – to choose what is good for me. After exploring these five years, I want to work especially for rural people. I want to create opportunities for education in rural area. I want the villagers to realize that living in rural India can be a better option than moving to urban areas; the only thing here is that you need to provide them with ‘a ray of hope’ so they can grow by their own will and abilities.

About IDIA:

IDIA is a pan-India movement to train underprivileged students and help transform them into leading lawyers and community advocates. IDIA is premised on the notion that access to premier legal education empowers marginalized communities and helps them help themselves. IDIA selects and trains students from underprivileged backgrounds (IDIA Trainees) to crack top law entrance examinations in India. Once they are admitted to top law colleges, it provides a scholarship to these students (IDIA Scholars) that comprises financial support, training and mentorship among other things.

Read more about IDIA here: https://www.idialaw.org/

Get in touch with them here: info@idialaw.org

SCC Online is now on Telegram and Instagram. Join our channel @scconline on Telegram and @scconline_ on Instagram and stay updated with the latest legal news from within and outside India

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Gujarat High Court: A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and P.B. Pardiwala, J., while addressing an issue with regard to the live streaming of the Court proceedings held that a committee to work out the modalities for the said purpose has been constituted comprising of two Judges of this Court.

A law student raised the issue with regard to the Live Streaming/Open Access of the Court proceedings and in the public interest Gujarat High court should work out the necessary modalities for the said purpose.

Bench on perusal of the material on record, stated that to observe the  requirement of an open Court proceedings, members of the public should be allowed to view the Court hearings through video conferencing except the proceedings ordered for the reasons recorded in writing to be conducted in-camera.

Right to Know and receive information is one of the facts of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and for which reason the public is entitled to witness the Court proceedings.

As, the above-stated Court proceedings involve the issue impacting the public at large or a section of the public.

Bench appreciated the efforts of the 3rd year law student appeared in person in the public interest.

Further, in line of the above-stated observations, Bench stated that to work out the modalities to facilitate the people at large including the media to watch the virtual hearing, Committee of two Judges of this High Court has been constituted pursuant to Standing Committee’s decision on 25-06-2020.

In the near future, a report of the committee is expected after which to allow access to the public at large including the media persons of print digital and electronic media shall be finalized.

Petition was disposed of in view of the above. [Pruthvirajsinh Zala v. Gujarat High Court, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 1055 , decided on 20-07-2020]

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Delhi High Court: Anup Jairam Bhambhani, J., directed the the Delhi Police to assure that the immediate removal of a law student’s pictures from the Pornographic Website should be done as the images were taken without her consent from the social media platforms.

Petitioner who is a law student from Bangalore complained that her pictures that she had posted on social media platforms ‘Instagram’ and ‘Facebook’ have mischievously and illegally been lifted and placed by respondent’s 6 and 5 — Pornographic website along with derogatory captions.

An online complaint to DCP-South on 11-07-2020 was filed, but no action was taken.

Petitioner’s counsel, Sarthak Maggon submitted that petitioner verily believes that respondent 5 is a spurious website, which carries pornographic content and which ought to have been banned and taken down from the world-wide web by the competent authorities.

Respondent 5 unauthorizedly and illegally in utter violation of the provisions of Information Technology Act, 2002 and Penal Code, 1860 placed the petitioner’s photographs on that website.

By reason of the inaction on the part of the authorities, these photographs have already received 15,000 views.

Rahul Mehra, Counsel for respondent 2/State of NCT of Delhi submitted that urgent and immediate steps would be taken to first take down the petitioner’s photographs that have been uploaded onto the errant website and subsequently necessary investigation will be carried out to trace and punish the offenders.

Bench directed that the complaint made by the petitioner be transferred to the Cyber Prevention Awareness and Detection Unit (CyPAD) of Delhi Police and that immediate action as assured be taken to remove the petitioner’s photographs from the errant website. Matter to be listed on 30-07-2020. [X v. UOI, 2020 SCC OnLine Del 761 , decided on 17-07-2020]

Hot Off The PressNews

Supreme Court: The bench of Ashok Bhushan and Naveen Sinha, JJ has dismissed a petition filed against the Allahabad High Court order granting bail to former BJP MP Swami Chinmayanand in a case pertaining to the alleged rape of a law student in Shahjahanpur, Uttar Pradesh.

The bench also issued a notice to Chinmayanand on another plea seeking transfer of the trial in the rape case against him from Uttar Pradesh to Delhi. It, however, refused to stay the trial of the case. The Bench, while refusing to interfere with the Allahabad High Court order, said the High Court had imposed sufficient conditions to ensure that the accused would not tamper with evidence or threaten witnesses.

Senior advocate Colin Gonsalves, appearing for the victim, claimed that secret videos of the law student (/topic/law-student) bathing were filmed, which were used by Chinmayanand to threaten her and to rape her. He told the court that the High Court, while granting bail, had noted that there was an apprehension of tampering with evidence and threatening but Chinmayanand was still granted bail.

The court, however, said that the apprehensions are taken note of by the High Court which is why certain conditions were imposed, else it would have been an unconditional bail.

“We understand your anxiety but the High Court is monitoring the investigation pursuant to the Supreme Court’s orders. Protection is provided in a substantial manner. Everything has been considered and a charge sheet is filed. When charges have to be framed, the law will take its course,”

In February, Allahabad High Court had transferred from Shahjahanpur to Lucknow the trial in the sexual abuse case against Chinmyanand. The Allahabad High Court had on February 3 granted bail to Chinmayanand, a former Union minister of state, in the alleged rape case filed by a woman who studied law in a college run by Chinmayanand in UP’s Shahjahanpur.

In December 2019, the 23-year-old law student, who has accused Chinmayanand of rape, was released from a district jail in connection with an extortion case after she was granted bail by Allahabad High Court.

The woman was arrested on September 25 in connection with an extortion case filed on the basis of Chinmayanand’s complaint alleging that she, along with three of her friends, had demanded Rs 5 crore from him. Chinmayanand had alleged that they threatened to make public some purported videos of him getting a massage from the law student. On the other hand, the woman had alleged that she was repeatedly raped and blackmailed by Chinmayanand for over a year.

(Source: ANI)