A bench of Justices RF Nariman, KM Joseph and BR Gavai issued notice to Centre on an application filed by Peoples Union For Civil Liberties<\/a> (PUCL<\/a>), a non-governmental organisation.
\"Don't you think this is amazing and shocking? Shreya Singhal judgement is of 2015. It's really shocking. What is going on is terrible,\" the bench told senior advocate Sanjay Parikh, appearing for PUCL.
Parikh said that despite express directions of the court in 2019 that all state governments should sensitise police personnel about the March 24, 2015, judgement, thousands of cases have been registered under the section.
The bench said, \"Yes, we have seen those figures. Don't worry we will do something\".
Parikh said there has to be some kind of method to handle the matter as people are suffering. Justice Nariman told Parikh that he should read his dissent verdict in Sabarimala judgement and it is really shocking.
Attorney General KK Venugopal<\/a>, appearing for the Centre, said that on perusal of IT Act<\/a> it can be seen that Section 66A features in it and in the footnote one can see it written that the provision has been scrapped.
\"Now when a police officer has to register a case, he sees the section and registers the case without going through the footnote. Instead what can be done is that we can put a bracket just after Section 66A and mention that it has been scrapped. We can in the footnote put the entire extract of the verdict,\" he said.
Justice Nariman said, \"You please file counter in two weeks. We have issued a notice. List the matter after two weeks.\"
The top court was hearing a fresh application of PUCL saying, \"That, shockingly, despite the order dated February 15, 2019, and steps taken towards compliance thereof, the applicant discovered that Section 66A of the IT Act has continued to be in use not only within police stations but also in cases before trial courts across India.\"
The NGO said, \"That in spite of the order passed by this Court on February 15, 2019, directing that copies of the judgment of this Court in Shreya Singhal should remain available with every High Court as well as all the District Courts and that the police departments in the entire country i.e. all States and UTs be sensitized about the said judgment, the facts mentioned above show that not only the investigations under Section 66A by the police are continuing but even in the trial courts.\"<\/body>","next_sibling":[{"msid":84139076,"title":"DoT to fine commercial SMS senders upto Rs 10k\/ violation for messages aimed at duping users","entity_type":"ARTICLE","link":"\/news\/dot-to-fine-commercial-sms-senders-upto-rs-10k\/-violation-for-messages-aimed-at-duping-users\/84139076","category_name":null,"category_name_seo":"telecomnews"}],"related_content":[{"msid":"84137224","title":"supreme court pti","entity_type":"IMAGES","seopath":"tech\/tech-bytes\/supreme-court-expresses-disbelief-on-continued-use-of-section-66a-of-it-act\/supreme-court-pti","category_name":"Supreme Court expresses disbelief on continued use of Section 66A of IT Act","synopsis":"The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Centre, seeking a response on why the Section 66 of IT Act was still in use despite the law being scrapped in 2015.","thumb":"https:\/\/etimg.etb2bimg.com\/thumb\/img-size-235419\/84137224.cms?width=150&height=112","link":"\/image\/tech\/tech-bytes\/supreme-court-expresses-disbelief-on-continued-use-of-section-66a-of-it-act\/supreme-court-pti\/84137224"}],"msid":84139710,"entity_type":"ARTICLE","title":"Supreme Court expresses disbelief on continued use of Section 66A of IT Act","synopsis":"\"What is going on is terrible,\" a Supreme Court bench told Sanjay Parikh of People Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), which filed an application against the continued use of Section 66A of IT Act, which was scrapped in 2015.","titleseo":"telecomnews\/supreme-court-expresses-disbelief-on-continued-use-of-section-66a-of-it-act","status":"ACTIVE","authors":[],"analytics":{"comments":0,"views":295,"shares":0,"engagementtimems":1358000},"Alttitle":{"minfo":""},"artag":"PTI","artdate":"2021-07-05 15:56:08","lastupd":"2021-07-05 15:58:13","breadcrumbTags":["IT act","Supreme Court","Peoples Union for Civil Liberties","IT department","KK Venugopal","Section 66A","information technology act","PUCL","it news","policy"],"secinfo":{"seolocation":"telecomnews\/supreme-court-expresses-disbelief-on-continued-use-of-section-66a-of-it-act"}}" data-authors="[" "]" data-category-name="" data-category_id="" data-date="2021-07-05" data-index="article_1">
- Telecom乐动扑克News
- 2分钟阅读
最高法院表示怀疑的继续使用66条款的行为
“太可怕了,”最高法院的长椅上告诉桑杰•帕里克以人公民自由联盟(PUCL),这对66条款的继续使用提起一个应用程序的行为,并于2015年被取消。
读到
新德里消息:的最高法院周一说,这是“惊人的”和“令人震惊”,人们还在订了下节66的信息技术法案,由法院在2015年被取消。
长椅上的大法官RF纳里曼,公里约瑟夫和BR Gavai发出申请,通知中心国人民公民自由联盟(PUCL),一个非政府组织。
“你不觉得这是惊人的和令人震惊的吗?Shreya Singhal判断是2015年的。这真是令人震惊。什么是可怕的,”法官告诉高级主桑杰帕里克说,PUCL出现。
帕瑞克豪表示,尽管表达的方向法院在2019年,所有的政府都应该变得敏感警方人员3月24日,2015年,判断,成千上万的病例注册下一节。
法官说,“是的,我们已经看到这些数据。别担心我们会做些什么”。
帕瑞克豪表示必须有一些方法来处理这件事的人的痛苦。正义纳里曼告诉帕里克说,他应该读他的异议裁定Sabarimala判断和真的很震惊。
总检察长KK Venugopal为中心,出现,说熟读的它的行为可以看出,第66条脚注的特性,人们可以看到它写规定已经取消。
“当警察必须注册一个案例中,他看到了部分和注册情况下不经过脚注。相反能做些什么,我们可以放一个支架后第66节提到,它被废除。我们可以在脚注的整个提取判决,”他说。
正义纳里曼说:“你请在两周内文件计数器。我们已经发布了一份通知。两周后。”
的最高法院听证会是一个新的应用PUCL说,“令人震惊的是,尽管订单日期为2月15日,2019年,采取向合规,申请人发现66条款的法案仍在使用不仅在警察局还在案件审判法庭在印度。”
非政府组织说:“尽管订单通过法院2月15日,2019年,导演复制Shreya Singhal判决的法院应与每一个最高法院以及保持可用的所有地区法院和警察部门在整个国家即所有各省和敏化的判断说,上面提到的事实表明,不仅在第66节被警察的调查正在继续但即使在审判法院。”
长椅上的大法官RF纳里曼,公里约瑟夫和BR Gavai发出申请,通知中心国人民公民自由联盟(PUCL),一个非政府组织。
“你不觉得这是惊人的和令人震惊的吗?Shreya Singhal判断是2015年的。这真是令人震惊。什么是可怕的,”法官告诉高级主桑杰帕里克说,PUCL出现。
帕瑞克豪表示,尽管表达的方向法院在2019年,所有的政府都应该变得敏感警方人员3月24日,2015年,判断,成千上万的病例注册下一节。
法官说,“是的,我们已经看到这些数据。别担心我们会做些什么”。
帕瑞克豪表示必须有一些方法来处理这件事的人的痛苦。正义纳里曼告诉帕里克说,他应该读他的异议裁定Sabarimala判断和真的很震惊。
总检察长KK Venugopal为中心,出现,说熟读的它的行为可以看出,第66条脚注的特性,人们可以看到它写规定已经取消。
“当警察必须注册一个案例中,他看到了部分和注册情况下不经过脚注。相反能做些什么,我们可以放一个支架后第66节提到,它被废除。我们可以在脚注的整个提取判决,”他说。
正义纳里曼说:“你请在两周内文件计数器。我们已经发布了一份通知。两周后。”
的最高法院听证会是一个新的应用PUCL说,“令人震惊的是,尽管订单日期为2月15日,2019年,采取向合规,申请人发现66条款的法案仍在使用不仅在警察局还在案件审判法庭在印度。”
非政府组织说:“尽管订单通过法院2月15日,2019年,导演复制Shreya Singhal判决的法院应与每一个最高法院以及保持可用的所有地区法院和警察部门在整个国家即所有各省和敏化的判断说,上面提到的事实表明,不仅在第66节被警察的调查正在继续但即使在审判法院。”
评论
现在评论 阅读评论(1)所有评论
找到这个评论进攻?
下面选择你的理由并单击submit按钮。这将提醒我们的版主采取行动