In Delhi, activist Sheeba Fehmi's review petition following a court order directing the police to file an FIR against her for "anti-national" Facebook posts was dismissed in Tis Hazari court earlier this week. Back in 2011, she had filed a complaint against one Pankaj Dwivedi, who had sent her e-mails strongly opposing her political views on Facebook, threatening her with "consequences" if she did not fall in line.
The court not only ruled in favour of Dwivedi in 2012, but also directed the police to file an FIR against Fehmi for posting "anti-national" content. Fehmi, several of whose posts had been critical of then Gujarat CM Narendra Modi, has now approached the Delhi High Court with the matter.
Fehmi says she is strongly opposed to section 66 A of the IT act, under which Dwivedi was booked. "I had no agency in the matter when the police booked him under 66 A. He was then acquitted by the same people under the section," Fehmi told TOI.
Section 66 A of the IT Act can be employed against anyone who sends any information by computers "that is grossly offensive or has menacing character". Chodankar has been booked under this in addition to sections 153(A) and 295(A) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Section 125 of the People's Representation Act, which cover promoting enmity between groups.
The Act attracted most attention in 2012 with a few notable arrests and cases. In November 2012 following the death of Bal Thackeray, a girl from Palghar, Maharashtra had been arrested for a Facebook post. She had posted a status questioning the legitimacy of the bandh in the state following the late Shiv Sena supremo's death. Oddly, a friend of hers who had clicked "like" on the status was also put behind bars. After a national outcry, charges against the teenage girls were dropped.
The same year, a businessman was arrested under 66 A for alleging former finance minister P Chidambaram's son Karti Chidambaram of amassing disproportionate assets.
Cartoonist Aseem Trivedi's website - Cartoons Against Corruption — was also taken down under the same section back in 2012 for "sedition". He was later arrested. "The new government should take care that this case doesn't send out the wrong message," says Trivedi.
That very year, law student Shreya Singhal filed a PIL in the Supreme Court seeking an amendment of the IT Act. "There shouldn't be a trail of suppressive cases like this. People should be allowed to say what they want. An aggrieved person can file a defamation case. His (Chodankar's) choice of words might not have been the best, but to face arrest for this is just out of place," says Singhal.
In December 2012, in a Rajya Sabha debate, MPs such as Gyan Prakash Pilania of the BJP, D. Bandyopadhyay of the AITC and Baishnab Parida of the BJD, Narendra Kumar Kashyap of the BSP and Basavaraj Patil of the BJP had supported a resolution for the amendment of Section 66A.
0 comments:
Post a Comment