PIL filed for regulatory framework for cyber crimes Supreme Court issues notice
The Supreme Court has on Friday issued notice to the Central and Maharashtra governments in a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking framing of regulations and guidelines for effective investigation of cyber crimes. A three judge Bench comprising of Chief Justice Altamas Kabir and Justices Anil R. Dave and Vikramajit Sen heard the writ petition [Dilipkumar Tulsidas Shah v. Union of India, W.P. (C) 97/2013] filed by Dilipkumar Tulsidas Shah, an industrialist based in Pune, who was arrested for an alleged cyber crime, which he claims he had not committed.
The Supreme Court has on Friday issued notice to the Central and Maharashtra governments in a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking framing of regulations and guidelines for effective investigation of cyber crimes. A three judge Bench comprising of Chief Justice Altamas Kabir and Justices Anil R. Dave and Vikramajit Sen heard the writ petition [Dilipkumar Tulsidas Shah v. Union of India, W.P. (C) 97/2013] filed by Dilipkumar Tulsidas Shah, an industrialist based in Pune, who was arrested for an alleged cyber crime, which he claims he had not committed.
Advocate Krishan Kumar was the Advocate on Record for the petitioner while Advocate Abhay Nevagi argued before the Court. Nevagi contended that the petitioner was wrongly arrested for the creation of a fake Facebook profile [an offence under Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act)]. The arrest was based on information given by Facebook which had informed the cyber crime cell of the date of creation of the fake profile. However, he submitted that the “said date was stated in a format used in the United States of America, which was different from the commonly used format in India, and was accordingly misinterpreted by the police leading to the criminal case against the Petitioner”.
Nevagi argued that because of the ignorance of investigative agencies and the lack of a regulatory framework with respect to cyber crimes in India, instances of misplaced application of penal provisions of the IT Act and the Indian Penal Code are rampant. He submitted that the same has, consequently, resulted in the violation of fundamental rights.
The Court asked Nevagi to elucidate the relief, which the petitioner was seeking. Nevagi prayed for directions to be issued to the respondents to frame rules, regulations and guidelines for effective investigation of cyber crimes.
The petitioner has also sought directions against the respondents to carry out proper and widespread awareness campaigns particularly for investigating agencies, intermediaries such as internet service providers and the judiciary, regarding the various forms of cyber crimes sought to be criminalized by the IT Act or any other penal law used to tackle cyber crimes.
The Court issued notice to the respondents and clubbed the matter with Shreya Singhal v. Union of India wherein similar issues were raised. Both the matters will be heard together.
Dilipkumar Tulsidas Shah vs. Union of India & Ors. by barandbench
APPRENTICE LAWYER
Wednesday, June 19, 2013 - 5:18pm
Comments (2)
Monday, June 17, 2013 - 10:46am
Comments (1)
Comments
yash pal
March 6, 2013 - 10:01amIt needs other aspect to do - disseminate or define various aspects of cyber crime e.g. hacking of a website, cyber stalking, financial crime (Fin-e-crime)using cyber space, though the funds embezzled after exchange of ATM card are not exactly cyber crime but the funds transfer to other accounts and thereafter withdrawal from them should be dealt with under a single law. Above all, a single command / grid to coordinate among different cyber crime cell particularly dealing with financial frauds through Internet Banking, Cards-debit or credit since their place is wide spread - victim, beneficiary, IP address, computer or ATM used. All these may belong to more than one state, as such, prompt action at various placed is difficult by one Investigating official. This command should simultaneously direct all concerned Cells to investigate people/machine under command area, first all the evidences from the victim's machine be collected e.g. malware, spyware or receipt responding a phishing mail be investigated by the IO, thereafter beneficiaries of such unauthorised funds transfer be interrogated by the cyber crime cell under who command area they reside to speedily collect the information / evidence.
Add new comment