SC Stays Arrest of Man Accused of Uploading Porn (sex)Clip on Daughter-in-law's Laptop:-
According to the FIR registered in Rajsamand district, Jayesh made a sex video and uploaded in the woman's laptop. He also allegedly hacked her gmail and posted the video there. This was done allegedly with an intent to torture the daughter-in-law over dowry demands.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has stayed the arrest of a man, accused of hacking email of his daughter-in-law and uploading porn videos in her laptop.
A bench of Justices J Chelameswar and Sanjay K Kaul restrained the Rajasthan police from arresting the accused, and sought a reply why his custodial interrogation was required.
The Court, however, directed Jayesh to assist in the investigation being carried out under the provisions of the Information Technology Act and Indian Penal Code. "Issue notice. There shall be stay of arrest of the petitioner, in the meantime. However, the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation," stated the order.
The Rajasthan High Court has on two occasions in the past dismissed the anticipatory bail application of Jayesh, and asked him to surrender first.
Senior advocate Tulsi appeared for the petitioner and submitted that there is no recovery to be made at Jayesh's instance and that the charges did not warrant his arrest at all.
According to the FIR registered in Rajsamand district, Jayesh made a sex video and uploaded in the woman's laptop. He also allegedly hacked her gmail and posted the video there. This was done allegedly with an intent to torture the daughter-in-law over dowry demands.
mylegaadviser.blogspot.com Viewing an obscene object is not an offence:-
It only, becomes an offence when someone having in possession of such objects with intention to or the purpose for sale, distribution, public exhibition, hire or putting it into circulation through net or by any other means of media.
whereas, If the obscene object is kept in a house for private viewing, the accused cannot be criminalized for obscenity.
J.Vijaya K.T. of High Court Bombay, had quashed obscenity charges against top customs officers who were arrested following a police raid at a bungalow in Lonavla in 2008. Merely viewing an "obscene" film in the privacy of a house is not obscenity as defined under the court ruled.
Recently, among teen aged minors, particularly boys in urban societies, watching a "blue film- pornography" can be often considered as misleading his mind and could be spoiling of prominent age , albeit a furtive one. But, while an adults who viewing pornographic contents or videos in his exclusive possession, can not be charged with obscenity if they are doing so in private.
Whereas, it is very surprising that Indian IT Act 2000 does not comprise or cover under it that personal viewing of any obscenity be declared as an offence, and off course it could not be because it may curtail the right to liberty to live unless it actually instigate or provoke to do obscenity.
In fact, IT Act 2000 does not mention any crime specifically as against women and children; whereas, it simply enshrines under section 67 of IT Act such as- "publishing in electronic form of information which is obscene. Also it does not even say about the typical cyber crimes like cyber stalking, morphing and E-mail spoofing as offence.
In coming days, India shall be crossing the danger mark in cyber crime targeting women and children by the increasing access to use of net. There were at least 40 cases in 2006 of which few were registered, while in Delhi it was 30 cases.
Most of the time and it has been common method to used by me is to email vulgar photographs of themselves to women, asking them for date or inquiring how much they charge for ' service'.
the real problem is associated with Cyber Crimes , are it's Jurisdiction, loss of evidence and sometimes cyber savy judges who could understand , how the technical things happen while case are being dealt under IT crimes.
Six months period can be waived off, stipulated under Section 10A(2) of Divorce Act, 1869
https://lawrato.com/advocate-sanjay-kr-jha
In Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur : AIR 2017 SC 4417, the Hon'ble Supreme Court considered the question whether the minimum period of six months stipulated under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for a motion for passing decree of divorce on the basis of mutual consent is mandatory or directory and whether such period can be relaxed in exceptional situations.
Contact Me for any queries or faqs...!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLitigation & Non-litigation: Corporate, Business / Trade processing;
ReplyDeleteLegal docu:-Agreements / Contract (I.T), Deeds, Lease, Licence, POA, LOI etc.;
Insurance, Copyright, Trademarks-Regt. & disputes, Recovery, Notices, Real Estate Or
Any matter Civil & Criminal:- Marriage, Divorce, Bail -498(A), Quashing, Immigration,
Property; By-www.mylegaladviser.blogspot.com
Cyber Crime:----
ReplyDeleteSC Stays Arrest of Man Accused of Uploading Porn (sex)Clip on Daughter-in-law's Laptop:-
According to the FIR registered in Rajsamand district, Jayesh made a sex video and uploaded in the woman's laptop. He also allegedly hacked her gmail and posted the video there. This was done allegedly with an intent to torture the daughter-in-law over dowry demands.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has stayed the arrest of a man, accused of hacking email of his daughter-in-law and uploading porn videos in her laptop.
A bench of Justices J Chelameswar and Sanjay K Kaul restrained the Rajasthan police from arresting the accused, and sought a reply why his custodial interrogation was required.
The Court, however, directed Jayesh to assist in the investigation being carried out under the provisions of the Information Technology Act and Indian Penal Code.
"Issue notice. There shall be stay of arrest of the petitioner, in the meantime. However, the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation," stated the order.
The Rajasthan High Court has on two occasions in the past dismissed the anticipatory bail application of Jayesh, and asked him to surrender first.
Senior advocate Tulsi appeared for the petitioner and submitted that there is no recovery to be made at Jayesh's instance and that the charges did not warrant his arrest at all.
According to the FIR registered in Rajsamand district, Jayesh made a sex video and uploaded in the woman's laptop. He also allegedly hacked her gmail and posted the video there. This was done allegedly with an intent to torture the daughter-in-law over dowry demands.
mylegaadviser.blogspot.com
ReplyDeleteViewing an obscene object is not an offence:-
It only, becomes an offence when someone having in possession of such objects with intention to or the purpose for sale, distribution, public exhibition, hire or putting it into circulation through net or by any other means of media.
whereas, If the obscene object is kept in a house for private viewing, the accused cannot be criminalized for obscenity.
J.Vijaya K.T. of High Court Bombay, had quashed obscenity charges against top customs officers who were arrested following a police raid at a bungalow in Lonavla in 2008. Merely viewing an "obscene" film in the privacy of a house is not obscenity as defined under the court ruled.
Recently, among teen aged minors, particularly boys in urban societies, watching a "blue film- pornography" can be often considered as misleading his mind and could be spoiling of prominent age , albeit a furtive one. But, while an adults who viewing pornographic contents or videos in his exclusive possession, can not be charged with obscenity if they are doing so in private.
Whereas, it is very surprising that Indian IT Act 2000 does not comprise or cover under it
that personal viewing of any obscenity be declared as an offence, and off course it could not be because it may curtail the right to liberty to live unless it actually instigate or provoke to do obscenity.
In fact, IT Act 2000 does not mention any crime specifically as against women and children; whereas, it simply enshrines under section 67 of IT Act such as- "publishing in electronic form of information which is obscene. Also it does not even say about the typical cyber crimes like cyber stalking, morphing and E-mail spoofing as offence.
In coming days, India shall be crossing the danger mark in cyber crime targeting women and children by the increasing access to use of net. There were at least 40 cases in 2006 of which few were registered, while in Delhi it was 30 cases.
Most of the time and it has been common method to used by me is to email vulgar photographs of themselves to women, asking them for date or inquiring how much they charge for ' service'.
the real problem is associated with Cyber Crimes , are it's Jurisdiction, loss of evidence and sometimes cyber savy judges who could understand , how the technical things happen while case are being dealt under IT crimes.
You are requested to Click on and rate it
ReplyDeletehttp://indiaplacesmap.com/Bihar/Places/Advocate-Jha-Associates-905993
https://lawrato.com/advocate-sanjay-kr-jha
ReplyDeleteSix months period can be waived off, stipulated under Section 10A(2) of Divorce Act, 1869
ReplyDeletehttps://lawrato.com/advocate-sanjay-kr-jha
In Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur : AIR 2017 SC 4417, the Hon'ble Supreme Court considered the question whether the minimum period of six months stipulated under Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for a motion for passing decree of divorce on the basis of mutual consent is mandatory or directory and whether such period can be relaxed in exceptional situations.
Thanks for sharing this post, this is very helpful. If you need legal advice in London then Visit us: https://www.whitehorsenotarypublic.com
ReplyDelete