It is for you to judge

Whenever ‘the’  Judge CT Selvam passes any order with regard to our website ‘savukku’  I get tremendously provoked.  My reaction naturally would be to write a scathing piece on him.

But a senior journalist keeps holding me back, apparently out of his unbridled love for the learned judge, and thus indirectly goading the latter into coming out with ever more sweeping judgements.  Thus it iss heads I win, tails you lose ! Am delighted, for I can’t do without him (Hope His Lordship mentions me in his will 🙂 )

Justice CT Selvam’s present judgment with regard to savukku is a great pleasure to read.  I refrain from making any comment, and it is for our readers to decide and react.   But I would certainly  like them to ponder over his Lordship’s immense knowledge about the internet and world wide web and also about cyber laws.

The judgment is reproduced here verbatim.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL

TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM

CRL. O.P. NO. 27389 OF 2013

ADV. R.Mahalakshmi

D/o Rajagopal                                                                      Petitioner

Vs

1.  The Commissioner of Police

Greater Chennai, Egmore

2. The Inspector of Police

Cyber Crime, Greater Chennai

Egmore, Chennai                                                                 Respondents

 

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to direct the 2nd respondent to register a case on the complaint on 07.09.2013 and take action against all the accused.

ORDER : – This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and the order of this court dated 20.03.2014 and made in Crl. O.P. No. 27389 / 2013 and upo hearing the arguments of Mr.P.Wilson, Additional Solicitor General for Mrs.P.Mahalakshmi, Advocate for petitioner and Mr.C.Emalias, Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondents, this Court made the following order :-

Today the matter is listed under the caption “for being spoken to”.

2.         Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that offending material is still being displayed on the site answering to the name www.savukku.net.

3.         Mr.P.Wilson, learned Additional Solicitor General of India, submits that viewing the site www.savukku.net in India stands blocked.   To this end, learned Additional Solicitor General of India has placed the communication dated 20.03.2014.   However learned Additional Solicitor General of India, states that even so, the offending material is being displayed through URLs which even accessed link on thereto.

4.         Under orders dated 20.03.2014, the second respondent was put upon duty in the following words:

“4. The second respondent is directed to ensure that the contents of the offending website (www.savukku.net) are not displayed in any form.  Towards this end, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to intimate each and every instance of display of the offending site to the Group Coordinator (Joint Secretary), Cyber Law Division, Department of Information Technology, Government of India, Electronic Niketan No.6, Central Govt. Offices Complex, New Delhi 110 003.  Upon receipt of such intimation of the second respondent, the authority aforementioned shall block the sites displaying the contents of www.savukku.net”

5.         On instructions and stating that the second respondent is action in obedience of the order, learned Public Prosecutor places before this Court the communication dated 11.04.2014 addressed to the Emergency Response Team, (CERT-In), Department of Information Technology, Government of India, Electronic Niketan No.6, Central Govt. Offices Complex, New Delhi 110 003.  This makes one thing clear.  The second respondent has not abided with the order of this Court.  As against the requirement placed upon him under paragraph No.4 of the order dated 20.03.2014, the communication dated 03.12.2013 and a further communication dated 11.03.2014 addressed to Emergency Response Team (CERT-In), Department of Information Technology, Ministry of Communications and Technology, Government of India, is placed to inform obedience of the order.  Rather than hold the second respondent guilty of disobedience of our order and proceed against him, this Court would put his action in the realm of incompetence.  It becomes necessary to pass the following order:

(i) By way of clarification, the Group Co-ordinator (Joint Secretary), Cyber Law Division, Department of Information Technology, , Ministry of Communications and Technology, Government of India, Electronic Niketan No.6, Central Govt. Offices Complex, New Delhi 110 003, is informed that the offending material displayed through the use of any URL from anywhere in the globe shall be blocked.

(ii) The second respondent shall be divested of his duty to act under order reproduced above.  The duty informed in paragraph No.4 of the order dated 20.03.2014 regards intimation of instance of display of offending material shall now be performed by the Additional Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai.   It is hoped that the seriousness of the public and social issue involved will be realised and due action taken.  This Court makes clear that in the event of any disobedience of this order, the petitioner informing that such is still the case, shall be viewed seriously and persons responsible will be called upon to answer before this Court.

(iii) The Additional Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai is directed to coordinate his activities towards obedience of this order with Director (DS.II), Department of Information Technology, , Ministry of Communications and Technology, Government of India, New Delhi and Group Co-ordinator and Director General (CERT) Ministry of Communication and Information Technology,  Government of India, New Delhi.  In the event of the purpose not being achieved despite such co-ordination, the Additional Commissioner of Police, Central Crime Branch, Chennai may address and take up the issue with the Secretary, Ministry of Communications and Technology, Government of India, New Delhi.

(iv) A copy of this order shall be forwarded to ‘Google India’, ‘Yahoo India’ and ‘You Tube India’ towards ensuring compliance with this order since otherwise they may well make themselves liable for action for offence covered by Section 69-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 which provides punishment of imprisonment up to a term of seven years.  Reference may also be had to Section 79 of such Act and Intermediaries Guidelines Rules, 2011, framed pursuant to such Section.

6.         This Court notes that in response to the request of learned Public Prosecutor requiring the petitioner’s cooperation with the investigative agency, the petitioner has informed that she always would be available for such purpose.

 

sd/-

Assistant Registrar (CS V)

Dated 30.04.2014

 

/true copy/

(Emphasis supplied)

Sub Asst. Registrar

 

To

1.         The Commissioner of Police,

Greater Chennai, Egmore.

 

2.         The Inspector of Police,

Cyber Crime, Greater Chennai, Egmore,

Chennai

 

3.         The Group Coordinator (Joint Secretary)

Cyber Law Division

Department of Information Technology,

Government of India,

Electronic Niketan

No.6, Central Govt. Offices Complex,

New Delhi 110 003

 

4.         The Additional Solicitor General of India

High Court, Madras

 

5.         The Additional Commissioner of Police

Central Crime Branch,

Chennai

 

6.         The Secretary

Ministry of Communication and Information Technology

Department of Telecommunication

Government of India

New Delhi

 

7. The Director (DS.II)

Ministry of Communication and Information Technology

Department of Telecommunication

Government of India

New Delhi