Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The internet is not out of bounds for the country’s law. This observation was implied by Kerela’s HC as Justice R Narayana Pisharadi appropriated the tools of justice on statements posted by citizens online. Bijumon, who was accused of spreading violent propaganda against the religion of Islam, its followers and Prophet Muhammad on the popular online platform- Facebook was denied anticipatory bail in lieu of his crimes. The Court realized the colossal influence of social media platforms which utilize the enormous ambit of the internet. It stated that the freedom of speech is not a shelter for malevolent persons to hide under. Intentionally assaulting another persons’ faith or beliefs is the perversion of their right.
Adhering to the norms of conduct, and the fact that freedom of speech is not absolute, The Court observed that cyber crimes have become a major threat to the cohesiveness of the society. Furthermore, The Court explained the grounds on which it rejected the anticipatory bail application of Bijumon. It said that the interrogation that would arise out of his arrest would be necessary to determine his level of involvement in the offence, as well as to ensure that he is not a part of a larger, organized unit spreading the doctrine of hatred.
Worth noting is that the Court also declared that mistakenly mentioning the incorrect provision while the filing of the complaint by the investigating officer is not a valid reason to quash the prosecution.
The Madras High Court, in a symmetrical verdict against BJP leader S V Shankar drew the line between unintentional errs and crimes during the prosecution in which the accused was guilty of sharing a demeaning post targeting women journalists.
86540
103860
630
114
59824