Videotaping inside Police Station not "spying" under Section 3 Official Secrets Act: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court recently ruled hat videotaping inside a Police Station does not constitute "spying" under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act [Ravindra Shitalrao Upadyay vs The State of Maharashtra]..Section 3 of the Act lays down penalties for spying in prohibited places.Justices Manish Pitale and Valmiki SA Menezes observed that the definition of 'prohibited place' under Section 2(8) of the Act does not include Police Stations."...the definition of ‘prohibited place’ as defined in section 2(8) of the Official Secrets Act is relevant. It is an exhaustive definition, which does not specifically include Police Station as one of the places or establishments, which could be included in the definition ‘prohibited place’," the Court stated.It, therefore, quashed a first information report (FIR) filed against a man for videotaping proceedings at a police station.The case against the accused was based on a complaint made by a police officer who alleged that during certain proceedings being undertaken in the police station, the accused secretly video recorded the proceedings on his mobile phone. Based on the complaint, he was was booked committing offence punishable under Section 3.Advocate DR Bhoyar for the accused person contended that if the contents of the FIR and the material placed before the Court were scanned, there were no ingredients of the offence punishable under Section 3. Hence, he prayed for quashing of the FIR.Additional Public Prosecutor SM Ghodeswar requested the Court to examine the material on record to determine whether or not the offence was made out. To assist the court, he mentioned the Court's judgment in Satvik Vinod Bangre and others v. The State of Maharashtra and Anr..The Court, based on provisions of the Act and statements of witnesses, ruled that none of the ingredients of the alleged offences were made out against the applicant.It underlined that even in Satvik Vinod Bangre, it had found that there was no material to invoke Sections 3 and 4 of the Official Secrets Act. Further, it stated that the allegations were far more serious in that case..Hence, the Court allowed the application and quashed the FIR as well as subsequent proceedings before before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Wardha..[Read Judgment]