Karnataka High Court
Manju vs The State By on 2 June, 2021
Author: K.S.Mudagal
W.P.No.56740/2017
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JUNE 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.MUDAGAL
WRIT PETITION NO.56740/2017 (GM RES)
BETWEEN:
MANJU
S/O K.SIDDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT JIGANEHALLI VILLAGE
KADUR TALUK,
CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT- 577 548 ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI SHARATH S. GOWDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE BY
KADUR POLICE STATION
REP. BY SPP
HIGH COURT
BENGALURU-560 001
2. AJAY KUMAR WODEYAR K.N.
S/O NANJUNDAPPA
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
R/AT HALEPET, KADUR TOWN
CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT- 577 548 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.NAMITHA MAHESH B.G., HCGP FOR R1;
R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA R/W SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE COMPLAINT DATED
26.07.2017 (ANNEXURE-A) LODGED BY RESPONDENT NO.2
BEFORE RESPONDENT NO.1 AND CONSEQUENTLY THE FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT REGISTERED IN CRIME NO.141/2017
DATED 27.07.2017 (ANNEXURE-B) BY RESPONDENT NO.1
W.P.No.56740/2017
2
POLICE FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION
66A(b) OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT 2008 ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING 'B' GROUP THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
"Whether the registration of the first information
report as per Annexure-B in Crime No.141/2017 of Kadur
Police station on the basis of complaint as per Annexure-A
against the petitioner is without the authority of law?" is
the question involved in this case.
2. Respondent No.2 Ajay Kumar Wodeyar K.N
filed the complaint dated 26.07.2017 (Annexure-A) before
respondent No.1 police alleging that the petitioner with an
intention to insult and annoy Shri Siddaramaiah, the then
Hon'ble Chief Minister, on 24.07.2017 at 10.30 p.m. on his
face book account has posted false information. It was
further alleged that the information was posted as if
obituary reference to the Hon'ble Chief Minister though he
was alive.
3. On the basis of such complaint of respondent
No.2 on 27.07.2017 respondent No.1 registered first
information report in Crime No.141/2017 of Kadur Police
W.P.No.56740/2017
Station as per Annexure-B against the petitioner for the
offence punishable under Section 66A(b) of the
Information Technology Act, 2008 ('the Act' for short).
4. The petitioner is seeking quashing of the said
first information report on the ground that much before
registration of the first information report for such offence,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal v. Union of
India1 has struck down Section 66A of the Act as violative
of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
5. In para 124.1 of the judgment in Shreya
Singhal's case referred to supra the Hon'ble Supreme
Court has struck down Section 66A of the Act as violative
of Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. Despite that
respondent No.1 has registered the impugned first
information report against the petitioner.
6. Article 20(1) of the Constitution of India bars
conviction of any person of any offence except for violation
of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act
charged as an offence. Article 21 of the Constitution bars
(2015) 5 SCC 1
W.P.No.56740/2017
depriving any person of his life or personal liberty except
according to the procedure established by law.
7. Since Section 66A of the Act was not at all in
force in view of the striking down of the same in Shreya
Singhal's case referred to supra, registration of the
impugned first information report on the basis of the
impugned complaint is clearly without the authority of law.
Therefore the petition is allowed.
The complaint (Annexure-A) and the first information
report (Annexure-B) in Crime No.141/2017 of Kadur Police
Station are hereby quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KSR
