Allahabad High Court
Hariom Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 15 October, 2020
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 1 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 10889 of 2020 Petitioner :- Hariom Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Satya Pal Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Sri Satya Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Kumari Meena, learned AGA for the State are present.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to quash the F.I.R. dated 21.07.2019 registered as Case Crime No. 178 of 2019 under Section 66-A of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and Section 506 IPC, P.S. Bela, District Auraiya.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the offence under Section 66-A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2000 has been declared ultra-vires by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shreya Singhal Vs. Union of India: (2015) 5 SCC 1 but still the FIR has been lodged under the aforesaid offence.
After the judgment of Shreya Singhal (Supra) declaring Section 66-A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2000 as ultra-vires, First Information Reports are being registered in the State of Uttar Pradesh and even other places. The Hon'ble Apex Court took congnizance of the said illegality and in the case of Peoples Union For Civil Liberties Vs. Union of India and others, W.P. (Crl) No.199/2013 passed the following order on 15.2.2019:-
"The learned Attorney General appears before us and has made a concrete suggestion, which we accept. The suggestion is that copies of this Court's judgment in 'Shreya Singhal v. Union of India' [(2015) 5 SCC 1] will be made available by every High Court in this country to all the District Courts. This should be done within a period of eight weeks from today.
Also, we direct the Union Government to make available copies of this judgment to the Chief Secretaries of all the State Governments and the Union Territories. This should be done within a period of eights weeks from today. The Chief Secretaries will, in turn, sensitise the police departments in this country by sending copies of this judgment to the Director General of Police in each State, within a period of eights weeks thereafter.
The application stands disposed of accordingly."
This Court is encountering a situation often where the First Information Reports lodged under Section 66-A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 are being challenged. The authorities concerned in spite the clear mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Case of Shreya Singhal (Supra) declaring the same as ultra-vires and later on in the case of Peoples' Union for Civil Liberties (Supra) having reminded the said situation through a specific order have become inresponsive and insensitive to the issue. Time and again reminders have been issued by this Court for effective and actual enforcement of it and of the fact that Section 66-A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2000 has been declared ultra-vires and also in spite of the fact that the said judgment declaring it to be so has been ordered to be circulated amongst the officers concerned, there appears to be no regards for the same and the situation remains as earlier as is the said section is well in force. The present situation prompts us to take up the issue again.
In this writ petition also we find that the FIR has been registered for the said offence and the State has not taken corrective measures in pursuance of the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court to direct its officials/officers not to register First Information Reports for the said offence as the same has been declared ultra-vires.
Ms. Kumari Meena, learned AGA also concedes the fact that the impugned FIR could not be registered under Section 66-A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2000 in view of the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Shreya Singhal (Supra).
Issue notice to the opposite party no. 2. Steps to be taken within a week.
Each of the respondents is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit.
Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may also be filed within two weeks' thereafter.
Let the matter be listed on 02.12.2020 before the appropriate Bench.
Till the next date of listing, investigation with respect to the offence under Section 66-A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 shall remain stayed and the arrest of the petitioner shall remains stayed under Section 506 IPC in the aforesaid case.
Registrar General of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow forthwith, for compliance and follow up. They are required to file their personal affidavit clearly disclosing and mentioning as to why First Information Report's are being lodged for offences under Section 66-A of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 in spite of the same being declared ultra-vires by the Hon'ble Apex Court and also why the order dated 15.02.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Peoples' Union for Civil Liberties (Supra) is being disregarded with impunity.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the petitioner alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 15.10.2020
M. ARIF
(Samit Gopal, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)