Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
A female officer in BSNL had documented a complaint against different representatives who put the emoji responding to a video she had posted in the official WhatsApp group. The group was proposed to share the complaints and lacks in the service of BSNL and to redress them and enhance the nature of service. The video included three BSNL clients grumbling about the lack of service. The complaint was enlisted under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, Scheduled Caste, and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. In the complaint, she expressed that due to the posting of crying smiley faces, she was put to mental distress and thus, she couldn't rest and she was crying all the night on the said day.
Under the steady gaze of the high court, the accused workers expressed that the posting of crying smiley faces was to express their sentiments because of video film and that it isn't expected to hurt the officer. Justice SS Sundar watched that an emoji is sent to express one's inclination about something, it can't be dealt with as an obvious follow up on others and Section 67 of the IT Act won't pull in as there is no indecency in the emoji. The court additionally watched that as the presenting of emoji is on express one's inclination, however, it might irritate the officer; it's anything but a demonstration pulling in Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998. Further, it was watched that the complainant had no case that smiley was planned to embarrass her for being an individual from Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribes. Subduing the criminal cases against the accused, the judge opined that they should not have enjoyed posting such emoji in light of a legitimate concern for BSNL since WhatsApp group is made for maintaining cooperation.
86540
103860
630
114
59824