By Rajesh Pandey
The Allahabad High Court has held that liking a social media post is different from sharing it, so mere liking a social media post will not attract section 67 of the Information Technology Act, which deals with obscene and objectionable material.
With this observation, Justice Saurabh Srivastava quashed the case against the applicant, Imran Khan, as the court found that he had merely liked a message published by another person, and there was no offensive post available in the applicant’s Facebook and WhatsApp accounts.
Allowing the application filed by Imran Khan, the court further ruled that liking a social media post does not amount to publishing or transmitting the post and thus will not attract Section 67 of the Information Technology (IT) Act.
The provision criminalizes publishing or transmission of material that is “lascivious” or appeals to the “prurient interest” of a person.
The court observed that a post or message can be said to be published when it is posted, and a post or message can be said to be transmitted when it is shared or retweeted.
“In the present case, it is alleged that there is material in the case diary showing that the applicant has liked the post of one Farhan Usman for unlawful assembly, but liking a post will not amount to publishing or transmitting the post, therefore, merely liking a post will not attract Section 67 I.T. Act.,” the Court ruled.
The court was dealing with an application filed under section 482 (inherent powers of the high court) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), a petition seeking the quashing of a case against a man named Imran Khan, who had liked a post by one Chaudhari Farhan Usman.
Usman’s post referred to a protest gathering that would be assembling near the collectorate to hand over a memorandum to the President of India.
Khan was booked for “provocative messages on social media, which resulted in the assembly of about 600-700 persons belonging to the Muslim community for arranging a procession without permission.”
The same, as per the police, caused a serious threat to public order of peace. Besides invoking provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Uttar Pradesh police had also booked the accused, Imran Khan, under Section 67 of the IT Act.
During the hearing, the applicant’s counsel told the court that no such content was found on his Facebook account. However, the police said he had deleted the same, but similar content was found on WhatsApp and other social media platforms.
From the material on record, the court found that Khan had merely liked a message published by another person. The same will not attract Section 67 IT Act or any other criminal offence, it opined.
The court also ruled that Section 67 of the IT Act cannot be invoked in respect of provocative material.
“Even otherwise, Section 67 of the I.T. Act is for the obscene material and not for provocative material. The words ‘lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest’ mean relating to sexual interest and desire; therefore, Section 67 I.T. Act does not prescribe any punishment for other provocative material.”
Thus, the court in its decision concluded that no offence was made out against Khan and quashed the case against him.
“Having heard the counsel for the applicant and having perused the record, I do not find any material which could connect the applicant with any objectionable post, as there is no offensive post available in the Facebook and WhatsApp accounts of the applicant,” the court reasoned in the judgment dated April 17
