GUWAHATI: The Allahabad High Court has ruled that liking a social media post does not constitute publishing or transmitting content, and as such, does not attract provisions of Section 67 of the Information Technology (IT) Act. The provision criminalises the publication or transmission of material deemed "lascivious" or appealing to "prurient interest."
ALSO READ: Elon Musk To Visit India Later This Year Following Discussion With Prime Minister Modi
According to a report by Bar And Bench, Justice Saurabh Srivastava, in the case of Imran Khan v State of Uttar Pradesh, clarified that a post is considered published when it is posted, and it is transmitted only when shared or retweeted. Liking a post, the court observed, does not amount to either action.
The case revolved around Imran Khan, who had liked a post by Chaudhari Farhan Usman, which referred to a planned protest gathering near the collectorate. The police alleged that the post led to the unlawful assembly of 600-700 people, primarily from the Muslim community, who gathered to protest without permission. They claimed this posed a serious threat to public peace. Khan was charged with provocative social media activity and booked under Section 67 of the IT Act, in addition to sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Khan’s defence counsel argued that no such content had been found on his Facebook account. The police maintained that similar content was deleted by Khan but could be traced on WhatsApp and other platforms. However, after reviewing the case, the Court determined that Khan had only liked Usman’s post and not shared or published any material. The Court concluded that this action did not fall under the purview of Section 67 of the IT Act.
The ruling further stated that Section 67 was intended to address obscene material and not provocative content. The provision specifically targets material that is “lascivious” or appeals to sexual desire, the Court noted, and thus does not apply to material meant to incite or provoke.
The Court ultimately quashed the case against Khan, stating that no incriminating evidence had been found connecting him to any objectionable posts. Justice Srivastava observed that neither Khan’s Facebook nor WhatsApp accounts contained any offensive material. The judgment, delivered on April 17, brings clarity to the application of the IT Act in cases involving social media interactions.
Advocates Abhishek Ankur Chaurasia and Diwan Saifullah Khan represented the petitioner in the case.
