Court rules that sharing or commenting on social media does not automatically constitute an offense under Juvenile Justice Act, IT Act, or IPC without specific legal violations.
In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court quashed the First Information Report (FIR) against a woman, Sowdhamani, who had been charged with multiple offenses for commenting on a shared social media post. The FIR, registered as Crime No.12 of 2024, charged her under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, and the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
The case arose when a political party member and District Information Technology Coordinator filed a complaint after observing a video on social media depicting minor girls with liquor bottles. The petitioner had commented on this video, leading to her being charged under Sections 504, 505(1)(b), and 153 of the IPC, Section 66E of the IT Act, and Sections 74 and 77 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
The bench, presided by Justice Mrs. L. Victoria Gowri, ruled that the offenses were not applicable in this case. The court emphasized that Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, which prohibits disclosing the identity of minors involved in legal proceedings, was not applicable as the petitioner had no direct involvement in any legal process concerning the minors. Furthermore, Section 77, which deals with providing intoxicating substances to minors, was not applicable as the petitioner was not responsible for giving any such substances.
Similarly, the court found that Section 66E of the IT Act, concerning invasion of privacy, was not violated as the petitioner merely commented on a video posted by a third party and was not the originator of the content.
Regarding the IPC charges, the court noted that no public alarm or disturbance was caused, and no complaints were filed by the public. The complaint appeared politically motivated, aimed at a supporter of an opposing political party.
Concluding the proceedings, Justice Gowri quashed the FIR, stating that sharing or commenting on social media does not automatically attract criminal charges unless specific legal provisions are violated. The ruling underscores the importance of distinguishing between political motivations and genuine legal violations in cases involving social media activities.
Bottom Line:
Sharing or commenting on a social media post does not automatically attract offenses under the Juvenile Justice Act, IT Act, or IPC unless specific legal provisions are violated by the accused.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 74, 77 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015; Section 66E of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008; Sections 504, 505(1)(b), 153 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Sowdhamani v. Inspector of Police, (Madras)(Madurai Bench) : Law Finder Doc id # 2855975
