Seminar Report

On
IT ACT SECTION 66(A)

Submitted To:

Submitted By:

Mr. C.P.Gupta

Devesh Pathak (10/508)

(H.O.D of Comp. Science Dept.)

Session:-2012 - 2013

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

RAJASTHAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, KOTA

Violation of Right to freedom of expression & speech by section 66a of IT

Act

SECTION 66A OF IT ACT: The most controversial, the most debatable, the most questionable
legislature of INDIAN CONSTITUTION
What SECTION 66A tells?
It says there is a punishment for sending any offensive message through any communication
service.Any person who sends by any means of computer resource or communication device
a)any content that is grossly offensive or has menacing character .
b) any message which he/she knows to be false but for the purpose of causing annoyance ,
inconvenience , danger, obstruction , insult ,injury, criminal intimidation , enmity , hatred or ill-will
,persistently encouraging the use of this information by making use of computer resources

Punishment: Imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine.
Incident:
The arrest of two girls who posted on facebook during the funeral of Balasaheb Thackeray.
Description:
A girl named Shaheen Thadahad posted on a social networking media : People like
Thackeray are born and die daily and one should not observe a bandh for that that is
opposing shutdown of the city. A friend of her named Renu Shrinivas liked her post and
shared it. A high ranking member in Shiv Sena ordered the city police to arrest the girls. The
girls were then arrested on the grounds of the IPC section 295-A and 505-2 and,of course
the IT Act 2008. The sections 295-A and 505-2 are concerned with the crime of hurting
religious sentiments and outraging castes and races whereas the IT Act 2008 is concerned
with the issues related to the cyber security of the country. It was later realized that police
had charged them under wrong sections. However the girls were later released a few days
later after protest all around the city and filing of petitions in the court.
Opinion:
I think that the cmment that was posted on fb against Bal Thackeray was not good because
its a matter of defamation for anybody who had done many works for the citizens of the
country.I know that according to article 19(1)(a) of constitution of our india, every citizen of
india has the right to freedom of speech & expression but if your views or expressions
defame a person in the society is not good. At this age everybody gets matured so we
should understand not to use this type of statements that hurt somebody.
But I am against the arrest of these two girls because whatever they did was not good but
what happened with them was totally wrong, without any warrant they were arrested by

police officers at midnight & they were beaten also, this is totally against law because until
unless police officers get permission they can not punish or arrest anybody.
Parts of a hospital run by a relative of Ms. Dhada were allegedly vandalized by Shiv Sena
activists angered by the Facebook post, according to a hospital official. According to reports,
a police complaint has been filed against the vandals, but no arrests have yet been made.
Mr. Raut had not heard of the alleged attack in the hospital so declined to immediately
comment.
There has been several cases which has made this section of IT Act controversial, debatable ,
Questionable & so on and so forth. Section 66(a) is unconstitutional. It is an attack on the
citizens of democratic india. This section imposes restriction on the uses of Right to
freedom of speech & expression. The question arises here is:- Are we free to express our
views in this democratic country.
Certainly if we say anything against the politicians then they cant tolerate it & they call
police officers & get us arrested. This act has no place in democracy.
What the situation of today is I tell you with an example:- A few months earlier
Subhramnyam said that Rahul Gandhi is buddhu now Rahul Gandhi cant do anything but if
he tweets it then Rahul can get him arrested so this is todays situation. Even IAS Officers or
Police officers do not know how to use the internet & they are aware of these sites.Even
they dont know what is the difference between print-media , electronic-media & socialmedia & they always try to tie up all these under the same law.
As you know about the case of Aseem Trivedi who is Indian political cartoonist , What he did
, he just created a website which was suspended by crime branch Mumbai, charges were
brought against him for creating cartoons of National food products, Political leaders &
Indian National symbol & so on.
This was taken under the State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act 2005. Chairman
Justice Markandey Katju of the Press Council of India, who is also a former Judge of Supreme Court
of India defended Aseem Trivedi saying that "he did nothing illegal" and in a statement, he
maintained that arresting a cartoonist or any other person who has not committed a crime, is itself a
crime under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), as it is a wrongful arrest and wrongful confinement.

Now my question is when all these get to read in the newspaper then no worry about it but when
they come in touch of social sites then this is called a crime.
Amendments according to me :1. First of all police officers need to be trained about this act because they dont know

about these social sites, they take all these under the same law & before taking any
action they will take permission of DCP & IG level in rural or urban areas & in metro
city respectively.
2. If there is such type of section then there should be meaning of annoyance ,

menacing & all these.

3. There is need to interpret some comments that dont hurt every time somebody.

Not to interpret an election mark as National flag , this case was filed by kiran
pawaskar who is secretary of union trades, had filed a complaint by misinterpreting
an election mark of congress as National flag against Mayank mohan Sharma who is
worker of union tarde leader.
4. I think there is need to write whole IT act again. I am talking about the incident when

all the torrent sites were blocked by all ISPs. But what should have done that they
should have blocked only those sites that contain pirated contents but all ISPs were
warned by Govt. so they blocked all sites , it was literally misuse of law. So there is
need to write whole act again.