'Liking a post not same as sharing': Allahabad HC drops case against man over social media like
The court made the observation while quashing a case against a man booked under Section 67 of the IT Act.
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that liking a post on social media is different from sharing it and does not attract Section 67 of the Information Technology (IT) Act.
Section 67 of the IT Act criminalises publishing or transmission of material that is "lascivious" or appeals to the "prurient interest" of a person.
Justice Saurabh Srivastava made the observation while quashing a case against a man named Imran Khan, who had liked a post by one Chaudhari Farhan Usman, reported Bar and Bench.
In the post, Usman had referred to a protest gathering near the Agra collectorate to hand over a memorandum to the President of India.
Also Read | Allahabad HC grants bail to a rape accused, says law being misused after ‘failed relationships’
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 police had alleged that the post caused a serious threat to breach of peace and booked Khan under provisions of the Indian Penal Code along with Section 67 of the IT Act.
{{/usCountry}}The police had alleged that the post caused a serious threat to breach of peace and booked Khan under provisions of the Indian Penal Code along with Section 67 of the IT Act.
{{/usCountry}}Also Read | No police protection for couples marrying against parents wishes: Allahabad HC
{{/usCountry}}Also Read | No police protection for couples marrying against parents wishes: Allahabad HC
{{/usCountry}}In the verdict delivered on April 17, Justice Srivastava 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.
{{/usCountry}}In the verdict delivered on April 17, Justice Srivastava 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.
{{/usCountry}}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 judge ruled, according to Bar and Bench.
{{/usCountry}}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 judge ruled, according to Bar and Bench.
{{/usCountry}}The court also ruled that Section 67 of 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," Justice Srivastava in the judgment.
