CHAPTER-V

JUDICIAL RESPONSE ON CYBER CRIME

With the advent of the Internet, cyber law has become an emerging
field. Cyber law encompasses cyber crime, electronic commerce,
freedom of expression, intellectual property rights, jurisdiction and
choice of law, and privacy rights. Cyber crime involves activities like
credit card fraud, unauthorized access to computer systems, child
pornography, software piracy and cyber stalking. Electronic commerce

ar
includes with encryption and data security. Freedom of expression
includes defamation, obscenity issues and censorship. Intellectual
property rights cover copyright, software licensing and trademark
protection. Jurisdiction focuses on who makes and enforces the rules
el
governing cyberspace. Privacy rights addresses data protection and
privacy on the Internet.

There are many issues to be resolved in Cyber law. Two areas of

t
cyber law requiring further clarification are cyber crime and jurisdiction.
Es

For example, in cyber law there are only a limited number of cases on
point and no major statutory schemes on the books. Policy makers and
attorneys dealing with cyber crime are often confined to referring to the
imprecisely applicable and scarce existing statutes and cases1. In cyber
jurisdiction, the Court must address the question of which lawmaker has
jurisdiction over actions taking place on the Internet. In the few cases the
Courts have adjudicated, they have applied long-arms statutes and
personal jurisdictional principles in making decision. Due to the paucity
of cyber jurisdiction cases, there is a limited amount of law for the legal
practitioner for reference.
1 Stewart Biegel, The Emerging and Specialized Law of the Digital Revolution, Los Angele Daily
Journal, Jan. 25, 1996.

{276}
 A. CYBER JURISDICTION:

The term jurisdiction refers to the authority of a court to hear a

case to resolve the dispute. In other words, courts power to decide a case
or issue a decree depends upon its jurisdiction. Since the legal
environment of e-commerce has no geographical boundaries, cyber
jurisdiction extends to all communications to anyone who has access to
website.2

The law of cyber jurisdiction involves determination whether a

ar
particular activity in cyberspace is controlled by the laws of the State or
country where website is located, or by the laws of the State where
Internet Service Provider (ISP) is located, or by the laws of the State
where user is located or by all these law?
el
The Internet can be seen as multi-jurisdictional because of the
ease which a user can access a Web site anywhere in the world. It can
even be viewed as a-jurisdictional in the sense that from the users
t
perspective state and national borders are essentially transparent 3 . For
Es

courts determining jurisdiction, however, this situation is more

problematic. The court in Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com
Inc.,4 said there is a global revolution looming on the horizon, and the
development of the law in dealing with allowable scope of personal
jurisdiction based on Internet use is in its infancy.

The developing law of jurisdiction must address whether a

particular event in Cyberspace is controlled by the laws of the state of
country where the Website is located, by the laws of the state or country

2 Ferrera G.R.: Cyber Law: Text and Cases (2001, Ohio) p.4.
3 David Post, Anarchy, State, and the Internet: An Essay on Law-Making in Cyberspace, 1995 J.
Online L. art. 3, Para. 36.
4.USDC, Western District of Pennsylvania, 1997 952 F. Supp. 1119, <http://zeus.bna.com/e-
law/cases/zippo.htm>

{277}
 where the Internet service provider is located, by the laws of the state or
country where the user is located, or perhaps by all of these laws. 5 A
number of commentators have voiced the notion that cyberspace should
be treated as a separate jurisdiction.6 In practice, this view has not been
supported by the Courts or addressed by the lawmakers.

Cyber jurisdiction issues have been dealt with primarily in the civil
courts. Since the advent of U.S. v. Thomas7, and Minnesota v. Granite
Gate Resorts Inc8., however, cyber jurisdiction issues have begun to be
examined in criminal courts as well.

ar
(a) Cyber jurisdiction in Civil Cases:

In determining whether jurisdiction exists over a defendant, the

el
U.S. Federal courts apply the law of the forum state, subject to the limits
of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.9

In Bensusan Restaurant Corp. v. King,10 the plaintiff, operator

t
of the New York jazz club known as The Blue Note, complained that
the defendant had infringed on its rights by using its trademark.
Es

Defendant, owner and operator of a small club called The Blue Note, in
Columbia, Missouri, had created a Web page, which allowed users to
order tickets to attend the clubs shows. The court had to decide whether
the creation of a Web site in Missouri containing a telephone number was
an offer to sell to citizens in New York.

5 Stuart Biegel, supra note 9, at 2.

6 David R. Johnson and David Post, Law and BordersThe Rise of Law in Cyberspace, 48
Stanford L.Rev. 1357, 1367 (May 1996).
7.74 F. 3d 701 (6th Cir. 1996) (USA)
8.568 N.W. 2d 715 (Minn. App. 1997); affd 576N.W.2d 747 (Minn. 1998)
9 U.S.C. Const. Amendment. XIV
10.937 F. Supp. 295 (S.D.N.Y. 1996), affd, 126 F. 3d 25 (2d Cir. 1997)

{278}
 The defendant argued the court lacked personal jurisdiction under
New Yorks long-arm statute. He defended all he had done was set up a
web site in Missouri aimed at Missouri residents. Furthermore, any
tickets sold over the Internet to users had to be picked up either at ticket
outlets in Columbia, Missouri, or at the club on the night of the show.

The court agreed finding that it took several affirmative steps to

obtain access to the Web site and use the information there. The court
also ruled that there was no proof that the defendant had directed any
infringing activity at New York. The court held that merely because

ar
someone can access information on the Internet about an allegedly
infringing product, it is not equivalent to a person selling, advertising,
promoting or otherwise attempting to target that product in New York.
el
Under Due Process, in order for the court to exercise personal
jurisdiction, it must be shown that the defendant had purposefully
established minimum contact with the forum state such that the
t
maintenance of the suit did not offend the traditional notions of fair play
and substantial justice. 11 The court ruled that the defendants simple
Es

creation of a Web site, that was available to any user who can find it on
internet, was not an act of purposeful availment of the benefits of the
state of New York. Creating a Web site was similar to placing a product
into the stream of commerce. The Web sites effect may be felt nationally
or even internationally, but this without more, was not enough to
establish an act was that purposefully directed towards the forum state.
Based on these rulings the Court held that an exercise of personal
jurisdiction would violate the protections of the Due Process Clause.12

11 Darby v. Compagnie Nationale Air France, 769 F.Supp. 1255, 1262 (S.D.N.Y.1991)
(quoting International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 316 (1945).
12 Benususan, 937 F.Supp. at 301.

{279}
 In Inset Systems, Inc. v. Instruction Set, Inc.13 the court held that
advertising over the internet was purposefully directed toward the forum
state14.

The US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri reached

a similar conclusion in Martiz, Inc. v. Cyber Gold, Inc.,15 finding that it
had jurisdiction over a California defendant in a trademark infringement
case, where the defendants only contact with the state was through its
California based website, which was accessible in Missouri16.

ar
In McDonough v. Fallon McElligott, 17 the court dismissed
plaintiffs contention stating that because the web enables easy world-
wide access, allowing computer interaction via the web to supply
sufficient contact to establish jurisdiction would eviscerate the personal
el
jurisdiction requirement as it exists. Thus, the fact that defendant has a
web site used by Californians cannot establish jurisdiction by itself18.

Similar decision is Pres-Kap, Inc v. System one, Direct Access,

t
Inc.,19 which involved electronic contacts through a computerized airline
Es

reservation system. In Burger King Corp. v. Rudezuitiz, 20 the US

Supreme Court asserted jurisdiction on the grounds of accessibility of
Internet. The court asserted that when a defendant has purposefully
directed its activities to a forum state and caused injury to an individual

13.937 F. Supp. 161 (D. Conn. 1996)

14.It is noteworthy that though a similar commercial situation was presented in Pres Kap, Inc.
v. System One, Direct, but the court recognized the special nature of online transactions.
15.No. 96-CV01340 (E.D. Mo. Aug. 19, 1996)
16.Supra Note 14
17.No. 95 Cir 4037 (S.D. Ca. August 15, 1996)
18.Supra note 14
19.636 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
20.471US 462 (1985)

{280}
or entity, the states invocation of jurisdiction comports with its Due
Process obligations21.

The same principle was carried forward in Hearst Corp. v.

Goldberge,22 the court held that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the
definition. In Mo Mayo-San Francisco v. Charles Memminger, 23 it
was held that simply registering someone elses trademark as a domain
name and posting a website on the Internet is not sufficient to subject a
party domiciled in one state to jurisdiction in another. There must be
something more to demonstrate that the defendant purposefully

ar
directed his activity in a substantial way toward the forum state.

The court in Zippo Mfg. v. Zippo Dot Com. Inc.,24 dealt with a
cyber squatting case, where the plaintiff sued an Internet news service for
el
trademark dilution, infringement and false designation for using the
domain names zippo.com, zippo.net, and zippo-news.com. The
court found jurisdiction and held that the likelihood of personal
t
jurisdiction being found can be constitutionally based on an entitys
presence on the Internet. The court held that the extent of an entitys
Es

presence, in the manner of sliding scale, was directly proportionate to the

nature and quality of the commercial activity conducted over the Internet.
The court found that a passive website that only made information
available to interested users was not grounds for exercising jurisdiction.
A website that entered into contracts and knowingly and repeatedly
transmitted computer files would be properly subject to personal
jurisdiction. In cases dealing with the middle ground, where interactive
websites exchanged information with a user, the exercise of jurisdiction

21.Steven Jensen, Jurisdiction of the Internet: The Courts and Alternatives Solutions, at
http://www.suffolk.edu/law/hightech/classes/cyberlaw/siensen/ppaper.htm.
22.96 Cin. 3620, 1997 US Dist Lexis 206 (SDNY Feb. 26, 1997)
23.1998 us Dist Lexis 13154
24 952 F. Supp. 1119 (W.D.Pa. 1997)

{281}
 should be determined by examining the commercial nature of the
exchange and the level of interactivity.

(b) Cyber Jurisdiction in Criminal Cases:

The question of cyber jurisdiction in a criminal case came to the

forefront of attention in early 1996 in U.S. v. Thomas,25 when the Sixth
Circuit upheld the highly publicized conviction of a couple operating a
pornographic bulletin board from their home. The defendants began
operating the Amateur Action Computer Bulletin Board System

ar
(AABBS) from their home in Milpitas, California in February 1991.
The AABBS contained approximately 14,000 Graphic Interchange
Format (GIF) files. These files could be accessed by members who
possessed the password. Once the password was entered, the users were
el
able to select, retrieve, or download the GIF files to their own computers.

The government got involved in AABBS activities when a Web

surfer found the site, explored the introductory screens, was offended and
t
subsequently complained. In 1994, a U.S. Magistrate judge for the
Es

Northern District of California issued a search warrant authorizing a

search of the defendants home. Because of the evidence found their
computer system was confiscated.

The defendants were convicted in the U.S. District Court, Western

District of Tennessee on federal obscenity charges. They appealed and
the appellate court affirmed. There were two premises for their appeal:
(1) The federal obscenity statute did not apply to intangible objects like
computer GIF files, and (2) Congress did not intend to regulate the type
of transmissions at issue because the federal obscenity statute did not
expressly prohibit such conduct.

25.74 F.3d 701 (6th Cir. 1996)

{282}
 The defendant asserted that the GIF files were an intangible string
of 0s and 1s, which only became viewable images after being decoded
in the AABBS members computer. The court disagreed, ruling that the
fashion in which the images were transmitted did not affect their ability
to be viewed or printed out by members in Tennessee. The defendant also
argued that they were prosecuted under the wrong statute and that their
conduct, if criminal at all, fell within the prohibitions of the statute which
addresses commercial dial-a-porn operations. 26 The court declined to
accept this argument. Instead, it ruled that the statute must be construed

ar
to affect the intent of Congress, which was to prevent the channels of
interstate commerce from being used to disseminate any obscene matter.

In Miller v. California,27 the court held that obscenity was to be

el
judged by what the average person applying contemporary community
standards would find to be obscene. Defendants argued the Internet
environment provides broad-ranging connections among people in
cyberspace, as such the notion of obscenity tied to geographic locale
t
would put a chill on protected speech. The defendants asserted a more
Es

flexible definition was needed because BBS operators could not select
who received their material.

The court ruled that the defendants had a pre-existing method of

screening potential members. By pre-screening their members, they could
protect themselves from being subjected to liability in jurisdiction with
less tolerant standards. This could be accomplished by refusing to give
passwords to users from those districts. The court further ruled the
defendants were free to tailor their messages on a selective basis to the

26 U.S.C. section 223(b) (1934, amended 1988).

27 413 U.S.15, 93 S.Ct. 2607, 37 L.Ed.2d 419 (1973).

{283}
 communities it chose to serve. Accordingly, it was held by the court that
there was no need to develop a new definition of community.

The case turned on the fact that even though the GIF files never
actually left Northern California and were arguably not obscene under
Northern California, Bay Area standards 28 , they were obscene by the
standards of Memphis, Tennessee. The Court applied the community
standards of the geographic area where the materials were sent as the
proper test, in affirming the lower courts holding that defendants were
violating federal obscenity laws.

ar
In Minnesota v. Granite Gate Resorts Inc,
Minnesotas Attorney General had stated in its Interest warning was
tested in court. The Attorney General had asserted the right to regulate
29
the policy
el
the activities of an online gambling service based in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The Attorney General argued that the defendant had explicitly
misrepresented its service as lawful on its Web page.30 The court denied
t
the defendants motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because of hits
from Minnesota at the defendants Website, the availability of a toll-free
Es

number that users could call advertised on its Web page, and the number
of Minnesota residents who had signed on to the defendants mailing list.

(c) Cyber jurisdiction in International Cases:

When adjudicating cases involving foreign nationals, the courts

must balance several factors. On a case-by-case basis, the courts must
consider the procedural and substantive policies of other countries whose
interests are affected by the courts assertion of jurisdiction. Keeping

28 In 1992 the AABBS computers were seized by the San Jose high-tech crime unit,
scrutinized and found insufficiently offensive to warrant prosecution.
29. 65 USLW 2440, 1996 WL 767431 (D. Minn. Dec 10, 1996).
30 The advertisement on the Internet stated as follows: a. Wagernet will provide sports fans
with a legal way to Bet on sporting events from anywhere in the world 24 Hours a Day!

{284}
these policies in mind, the court must then consider the reasonableness of
assertion of jurisdiction examined in the light of the interest of the federal
government in its foreign relation policies. When extending jurisdiction
into the international field great care and reserve must be exercised.31
Because of these sovereignty concerns, there is a higher jurisdictional
barrier when litigating against a foreign national.32

There are no international cyber jurisdiction cases, however, Asahi

Metal Industry Company Case33 and Core-Vent Case34 can both provide
the framework for future cyber jurisdiction cases.

ar
The Supreme Court in Asahi Metal Industry Company v.
Superior Court, 35 indicates that a plaintiff seeking to hale a foreign
citizen into court in the United States must meet a higher jurisdictional
el
threshold than is required when the defendant is a United States citizen.
In Asahi the court found that even though Asahi had minimum contacts
with the forum state, it would be unreasonable and unfair to find
t
jurisdiction for three reasons: (1) the distance between defendants
headquarters in Japan and the Superior Court of California and the
Es

unique burdens of submitting a dispute between two foreign nationals in

a foreign legal system; (2) Californias and the foreign plaintiffs slight
interest in having the case heard in California; (3) the affect on the
procedural and substantive interests of other nations by Californias
assertion of jurisdiction over a foreign nationals.

31 Asahi Metal Industry Company v. Superior Court, 480 U.S. 102 (1987).
32 Simatra v. national Enquirer, 854 F.2d at 1119.
33 Asahi Metal Industry Company v. Superior Court, 480 U.S. 102 (1987).
34 Core-vent Corp. v. Nobel Industries AB., 11 F.3d 1482 (9th Cir. 1993)
35 480 U.S. 102 (1987).

{285}
 Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Chuckleberry Publishing, Inc.36 is
an international civil case involving trademark infringement. In that case
court sidestepped the issue of international cyber jurisdiction relying on a
previous 1981 injunction against the defendant to base its finding of
jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the case provides useful insights into the
application of cyber jurisdiction principals in international cases.

In order to support personal jurisdiction in cyberspace the courts

now require that defendants provide more than mere accessibility to a
Website. Some sort of interaction is required. A requirement, which may

ar
be satisfied as little as one contact. The trend appears to be that
information providers must comply with the limitations of the laws
wherever the user is located, or find themselves subject to the users state
el
jurisdiction, and its civil and criminal laws. Case law indicates that the
courts are inclined to expect the information provider to determine where
the user is located and to block access to their site if access would be
illegal in the users locale. If they own an 800 or 900 number, they could
t
also be expected to block certain area codes to avoid prosecution.
Es

B. Cyber jurisdiction in Information Technology Act, 2000

However, the law has gone much further. It shall also apply to any
violation or contravention of the provisions of this Act done by any
person anywhere in the world. By means of this provision, the law is
assuming jurisdiction over violators of The Information Technology Act,
2000 outside the territorial boundaries of India. This provision is
explained perhaps by the unique nature of cyberspace, which knows no
boundaries.

36 939 F.Supp. 1032 (S.D.N.Y. 1996).

{286}
 The Information Technology Act, 2000 specifically provides that
unless otherwise provided in the Act, the Act also applies to any offence
or contravention there under committed outside India by any person
irrespective of his nationality37. It is however clarified that the Act shall
apply to an offence or contravention committed outside India by any
person if the act or conduct constituting the offence or contravention,
involves a computer, computer system or computer network, located in
38
India. The words act or conduct constituting the offence or
contravention involves a computer, computer system or computer

ar
network located in India are very significant to determine jurisdiction of
the IT Act over acts committed outside India. For assuming jurisdiction
over an act constituting an offence or contravention under the IT Act,
which is committed outside India, it has to be proved that the said act
el
involves a computer, computer system or computer network located in
India.

For instance, where a website is created in the US which contains

t
pornographic material, it shall not give the IT Act jurisdiction to question
Es

the site unless the creation or maintenance or running of the site involves
a computer, computer system or computer network located in India. But
where the said website uses a server or any other computer network
located in India, the IT Act would assume jurisdiction to question the
website under section 67 of the IT Act.

Another instance to explain the jurisdiction of the IT Act is where

a person from the US hacks a computer system or network in India,
section 66 of the IT Act would come into play to punish the accused for
hacking because his act involves a computer in India. Similarly, where a

37. Sec. 1(2) of IT Act, 2000

38. Sec. 75 of IT Act, 2000

{287}
 person anywhere in the world plants a virus into a computer system
located in India, he would be liable under Section 43(c) of the IT Act to
pay damages by way of compensation net exceeding Rs. 1 crore to the
victim.

Section 75 of the IT Act is restricted only to those offences or

contraventions provided therein and not to other offences under other
laws such as the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Jurisdiction over other cyber
crimes, for instance under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, has to be
determined by the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The

ar
fundamental principle on jurisdiction is the same under the IT Act39 and
the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, though stated differently. The basic
legal principle of jurisdiction under the Code of Criminal Procedure,
el
1973 is that every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a
court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed.40 These principles
in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 apply for determining
jurisdiction in trial by courts as well as in investigation by the police. In a
t
case where an offence is committed in more places than one, or partly in
Es

one place and partly in another, or where it is continuing and continues to

be committed in more than one local area, or where the offence consist of
several acts done in different local areas, then it may be inquired into or
tried by a court having jurisdiction over either of such areas 41 . In the
event where it is uncertain in which of several areas the offence was
committed, again it may be inquired into or tried by a court having
jurisdiction over either of such areas of uncertainty.42

39. Sec. 1(2) r/w Sec. 75 of IT Act, 2000

40. Sec. 177 of Cr. P.C., 1973
41. Sec. 178 of Cr. P.C., 1973
42. Sec. 178(a) of Cr. P.C., 1973

{288}
 In a case where an act is an offence by reason of anything, which
has been done and of a consequence, which has ensued, the offence may
be inquired into or tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction such
act has been done or such consequence has ensued43. For instance, in a
case of defamation, either of the courts, i.e. of the place from where the
defamatory letter was e-mailed and the place at which it was published or
received, if different, shall have jurisdiction to inquire and try the same. ]

To cite another instance; where in pursuance of misrepresentation

by A through e-mail from place X, property was delivered at place Y, A

ar
can be tried for the offence of cheating either at place X or Y. in a case
where a person in Bombay does an act of hacking of a computer system
located in Delhi, he may be tried either in Bombay or Delhi.
el
In a case where an act is an offence by reason of its relation to any
other act which is also an offence or which would be an offence if the
doer was capable of committing an offence, the first mentioned offence
t
may be inquired into or tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction
either of the acts was done. For instance, in a case of manufacture of sub-
Es

standard fertilizer in place X, which is marketed through e-commerce at

place Y, prosecution can be launched at either of the said places because
the marketing of the sub-standard fertilizers is an offence by reason of
sub-standard manufacture.

Certain specified offences have been required by law to be

inquired into or tried in certain places 44 . For instance, an offence of
criminal misappropriation or of criminal breach of trust, may be inquired
into or tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction the offence was
committed or any part of the property which is the subject of the offence

43. Sec. 179 of Cr. P.C., 1973

44. Sec. 180 of Cr. P.C., 1973

{289}
 was received or retained or was required to be returned or accounted for,
by the accused person45.

For example, if an employee of a company based at Delhi, by

operating through the internet bank account of his employer company in
a Bombay bank, transfers funds to his account at Calcutta, the case of
misappropriation can be tried either at Delhi or Bombay where the
offence was partially committed or at Calcutta where the money was
received and retained.

ar
The law also provides that in the case of any offence which
includes cheating, if the deception is practiced by means of letters or
telecommunication messages, it may be inquired into or tried by any
court within whose jurisdiction such letters or messages were sent or
el
where the same were received46. Moreover, any offence of cheating and
dishonestly inducing delivery of property may be inquired into or tried by
a court having jurisdiction on the place where the property was delivered
t
by the person deceived or where it was received by the accused person.47
Es

In a case where two or more courts take cognizance of the same

offence and a question arises as to which of the courts has jurisdiction to
inquire into or try that offence, this question shall be decided by the High
Court, under whose jurisdiction both such courts function48. However, if
the courts are not subordinate to the same High Court, the question of
jurisdiction shall be decided by the High Court within whose appellate
criminal jurisdiction the proceedings were first commenced49.

45. Sec. 181 of Cr. P.C., 1973

46. Sec. 182 of Cr. P.C., 1973
47. Sec. 182 of Cr. P.C., 1973
48. Sec. 186 (a) of Cr. P.C., 1973
49. Sec. 186 (b) of Cr. P.C., 1973

{290}
 In such circumstances, all other proceedings with respect to that
offence shall be discontinued. Where two or more courts have
jurisdiction over an offence, the choice of the court for institution of the
case lies with the complainant. He will obviously choose the forum,
which is most convenient for him and most inconvenient for the accused.

The law of jurisdiction stated in the Criminal Procedure Code,

1973 and Section 75 of the IT Act, 2000, as discussed herein, is clear,
specific and covers different situations which are likely to generally arise
in cyber crime cases. The internet by its nature and purpose operates

with one another.

ar
when the parties interacting or transacting are not physically face to face

Due to the global access of the internet, cyber crimes generally

el
tend to transcend or disregard geographical boundaries. These factors
imply that in most cases of cyber crime, except where insiders are
involved, there would be two or more places, one from where the cyber
t
criminal inflicts the injury-for instance hacks, and the place where the
injury is inflicted-for instance at the location of the victim computer,
Es

which is hacked. This is in contrast to traditional crimes of rape, murder

and kidnapping where the criminal and the victim are at the same place.
Moreover, every criminal makes all possible attempts to conceal his
identity and place of operation. Alibi is a common defence in criminal
matters.

This basic tendency of a criminal coupled with the permissible

anonymity provided by the internet makes the cyber criminal almost
invisible. Thus, in terms of practical application of the law of jurisdiction
over cyber crimes, in most cases, the place of jurisdiction shall be where

{291}
 the victim is inflicted with the injury, whether personally, for instance by
fraud, or on his computer, computer system or computer network.

There is a valid point in the criticism that such a law assuming

extra territorial jurisdiction passed by the legislature is not enforceable in
the real world. It is contrary to the principles of international law to
assume jurisdiction over citizens of another country, and so, it is likely to
lead to conflict of jurisdiction of different courts situated in different
national jurisdictions. It is also important to note that there are
differences between national legislation, laws, legal processes and
procedures.

ar
Further compounding the problem is the issue that a particular act
in one national jurisdiction is legal and not barred by law but the same
el
activity is illegal and barred by law, prevailing in another national
jurisdiction. Another ground of criticism has been that Section 1 does not
lay down the parameters of how such a provision would be enforceable in
t
practical terms across transnational boundaries and jurisdictions.
Governments can take recourse to the extradition process to bring to
Es

book the cyber criminals outside the territorial jurisdiction of their

country, provided there is a valid extradition treaty in place between the
relevant countries. But the route, as stipulated in Section 1 of the IT Act,
2000 is likely to throw up a complex arena of difficulties in actual day-
to-day implementation.

The existing international law pertaining to sovereignty of a nation

also details that a sovereign nation can make laws affecting people who
reside within its territorial boundaries. However, the birth of Internet has
seen geography become history and transactions taking place over
networks are transnational in nature, thereby complicating the entire issue

{292}
of jurisdiction. This becomes all the more evident from the emerging
principles from various judgments relating to Jurisdiction over Internet.
From the beginning of Internet, the issue of jurisdiction has continued to
challenge legal minds, societies and nations in the context of the
peculiarly inherent character of the Internet. Section 1(2) and Section 75
of the IT Act, 2000 provide for extra-territorial jurisdiction of the Indian
courts, which, however, seem implausible to be implanted. The courts in
India at present have not been uniform in following the US trend of
asserting jurisdiction on the basis of active accessibility of site. So far, in

ar
various Internet domain names related cases, the Delhi High Court has
assumed jurisdiction merely on the basis of accessibility of Internet.

Judicial Trends in India:

el
It must be stated that Indian case law on cyber jurisdiction of the
courts was almost non-existent until the Information Technology Act,
2000 was enacted and enforced on October 17, 2000. The development
t
of information technology as a faster and quicker means of
communication in the new millennium has led to certain unforeseen
Es

consequences resulting in cybercrimes coming before the Courts for

adjudication.

The case of P.R. Transport Agnecy v. Union of India and

others,50 involved the question of jurisdiction of court where the contract
between the parties residing in different places has been made on e-mail.
In this case, Bharat Cooking Coal Ltd. (BCCL) held an e-auction for coal
in different lots in which plaintiffs (P.R. Transport agency) bid for
40000 metric tons of coal from Dobari colliery was accepted. The BCCL
communicated the acceptance of bid by e-mail on July, 19, 2005. In

50. AIR 2006 All 23 (decided on 24.9.2006).

{293}
 response, the plaintiff deposited the amount of 81.12 lakhs through a
cheque in favour of BCCL which accepted the cheque and encashed it
but did not deliver the coal to the plaintiff. Instead, it (BCCL) informed
the plaintiff through e-mail communication that the said e-auction stands
cancelled due to some technical and unavoidable reasons. The plaintiff
found that the e-auction of sale of coal was cancelled by BCCL as there
was some other person whose bid for the same was higher, which had not
been considered earlier due to some flaw in the computer or its program
or feeding of data.

ar
The plaintiff (P.R. Transport) challenged the validity of
cancellation of its contract by the defendant in the High Court of
Allahabad. The defendant (BCCL) objected the territorial jurisdiction of
el
the Court on the ground that the High Court of Allahabad had no
jurisdiction in the case as the cause of action had not arisen in the state of
Uttar Pradesh. The plaintiffs, on their part, argued that the case fell
within the jurisdiction of the Court because the communication of
t
acceptance of the tender was received by them through e-mail in
Es

Chandauli in U.P. Having heard both the parties, the High court held that
in case of e-mail acceptance, the data transmitted from anywhere by the
account-holder goes to the memory of server, which may be located
anywhere and can be retrieved by the addressee account-holder from
anywhere in the world. Therefore, there is no fixed point either for
transmission or for receipt of e-mail. As provided in Section 13 (3) of the
Information Technology Act, 2000, an electronic document is demand
to be received at the place where the addressee has his place of business.

The acceptance of the tender will be deemed to be received by the

plaintiff (P.R. Transport) at the place where it has place of business i.e.
Varanasi and Chandauli, both in the state of Uttar Pradesh, hence the

{294}
Allahabad High Court had the jurisdiction to decide the case. On the
basis of decision in this case, it may be concluded that the judicial trend
with regard to exercise of jurisdiction by courts in cybercrimes must
conform to the norms of fair play and justice, which invariably depend on
following considerations:

(a) the extent of purposeful intrusion or illegal activities affecting States

affairs;

(b) extend of conflict with sovereignty of the State;

ar
(c) the forum of States interest in adjudication of the dispute;

(d) state's responsibility for protecting the interests of parties providing

them relief; and
el
(e) existence of an alternative forum.

In order to support States jurisdiction in cyberspace, the law

t
requires that it not only provides accessibility to website but also in some
way interacts with the victim.
Es

C. Judicial Response to combat Cyber Crimes:

The internet culture in its wake has give rise to a number of online
disputes, differences, and controversies etc. resulting out of misuse of
abuse of computer networks for illegal activities. Though disputes as
such are not new to human society as they are known to have existed ever
since the dawn of human civilization, but the distressing factor is that
disputes relating to online transactions are entirely diverse in their nature,
scope and treatment and therefore, the resolution of these cyber-related
disputes has emerged as a serious challenge for the courts of law because

{295}
 of the details involved in them with which the Judges are not thoroughly
conversant.

The factors which hamper judicial sentencing in cybercrime cases

are as follows:

i. Global nature of these crimes is such that they do not recognize

geographical o territorial boundaries;

ii. Want of clarity as to which court would have the exclusive

jurisdiction to try the case;

ar
iii. Variations in the legal systems and laws and procedure of different
countries as regard admissibility of cyber-related cases; and
el
iv. Uncertainty as to the exact definition of cybercrime and activities
which can be included within the ambit of cybercrime.

Cybercrime being of an intangible nature, it does not require any

t
physical violence or the presence of accused at the scene of crime. Under
these circumstances, the traditional adversarial system of litigation would
Es

hardly meet the ends of justice in cases relating cybercrime.

Commenting on the problem faced by the judiciary and the

enforcement agencies in dealing with computer-related crimes, the
Supreme Court of India in State of Punjab and Others v. M/s Amritsar
Beverages Ltd. and others,51 observed,

Internet and other information technologies have brought with

them the issues which were not foreseen by law. It also did not foresee
the difficulties which may be faced by the officers who may not have any
scientific expertise or not have the sufficient insight to tackle with the

51 AIR 2006 SC 2820 (Para II).

{296}
new situations. Various new developments leading to various kinds of
crimes unforeseen by our Legislature came to immediate focus.
Information Technology Act, 2000, although was amended to include
various types of cybercrimes and the punishment for them, does not deal
with all problems which are faced by the officers enforcing the Act.

A cursory glance at the judicial administration in the Indian setting

would disclose that the factors which influence judicial sentencing by and
large include age, sex, educational background, mental frame and
maturity of the offender. His motive and the circumstances under which

ar
the offence was committed and its consequence on the victim or the
society also has a bearing on the sentencing of the accused.

The offenders young age, immaturity and previous clean record

el
are generally good reason for leniency in sentencing while recidivism,
persistent association with criminals or criminal world as also the gravity
or seriousness of the crime, attracts severe punishment. However, these
t
are mere generalizations and do not in any way bind judicial discretion in
sentencing the criminals. The Judges while considering the punishment
Es

can hardly afford to overlook the overall collision of crime on society as

a whole. Courts decisions therefore, play a very important role in
deciding a future course of action in related cases52.

Although the case law available on cybercrime is far scantier as

compared with the traditional crimes, it is constantly growing due to
computer becoming more and more user-friendly with the people. The
courts have generally shown a tendency to treat cyber criminals guilty of
premeditated crime as probable danger to society and therefore, they are
unenthusiastic in mitigating the sentence of such offenders.

52.Paranjape N.V.: Criminology and Penology (13th ed.) page 246-47

{297}
 Some international and national judicial responses on cybercrime
have been given below to put in the legal perspective of the issue.

a. Judicial Response to Curb Pornography:

Pornography is the depiction of the obscene and indecent either

literally or pictorially, which has the tendency to pollute the minds of the
children and has every potential to adversely affect the moral hygiene of
the society and, therefore, the law strictly prohibits the creation,
publication and circulation of the same in the society to preserve the

ar
moral fabric of the society. Publishing the pornographic material,
therefore, it becomes urgent that the malaise of the same should be
checked Computer and internet are the easiest methods of circulating and
Generation, publication and circulation.
el
Pornography has been defined in the Oxford Dictionary as The
explicit description or exhibition of sexual subjects or activity in
literature, painting, films etc., in a manner intended to stimulate erotic
t
rather than aesthetic feelings; literature etc. containing this.53
Es

The crime called cyber pornography presents itself in various

ways posing new and new challenges before law and Courts both. Thus it
will be beneficial to look in to some decisions of Courts in order to
appreciate the functioning of law vis--vis the incidents of cyber
pornography.54

In United States v. Thomas, 55 a federal postal inspector in

Tennessee (U.S.A.) downloaded pornographic materials from the site of a
Bulletin Board Service (BBS) operator in California. He was arrested and

53 Amita Verma: Cyber Crimes & Law, 2009, Ist Edn. Central law Publications, p-120).
54 J.P. Mishra: An introduction to Cyber Laws. Ist Edn: 2012 Central law Publications, p-187).
55 74 F. 3d 701 (6th Cir. 1996) (USA)

{298}
convicted for delivering pornographic material which is an offence under
federal obscenity laws. The court laid down certain important principles
of law. It was held that GIF files are not intangible for the purpose of
federal obscenity laws. The distribution of obscene materials would fall
within the expression of knowing even without defendants having
specific knowledge of each individual transmission.

Further, obscenity is to be measured by community standards of

the place where material is received. The defendants ability to control
subscription and access to their BBS made them liable in this case for the

jurisdiction there.56

ar
downloading that occurred in Tennessee and thus amenable to

In an American case, namely, United States v. Kufrovich,57 the

el
accused was charged of an offence under Section, 2422 (b) and 2433 (b)
of the US Criminal Law for using internet communication to knowingly
persuade a minor to engage in sexual activity with him. The accused
t
argued in his defence that his contact with the victim was only through
the internet and not direct, hence he was constitutionally protected under
Es

the First Amendment and the conversation through the internet could not
be used against him in evidence. The Court, however rejected the defence
and held that the Communications Decency Act under which the charges
were brought against the accused, criminalises the use of internet and
telephone lines for the purpose of attracting a minor into sexual activity.

In R v. Graham Waddon., Southwark, 58 the defendant had

created images which were illegal under UK law, and had made the same
available to subscribers on a series of sites based in US and hosted by a

56 Farooq Ahmad: Cyber Law of India (Law on Internet), 3rd Edn. New era Law Publication, p-408.
57 1997 (16) 997 F. Supp. 246 (USA).
58 A decision by the Crowns court, dated 30 June, 1999

{299}
 US based Internet Service Provider (ISP). When charged of publishing
obscene articles contrary to S. 2(1) of UKs Obscene Publications Act,
1959, the defendant claimed that since he had published the said porn
literature abroad, the UK law did not apply to his act and, therefore, a UK
Court had no jurisdiction in his regard.

The Court, however, did not accept either of the pleas forwarded
by the defendant. The Court observed that, under section 1 (3) (b) of the
Obscene publications Act, 1959, publishing included data stored
electronically and transmitted. Since to transmit meant to send from one

ar
place or person to be other, in the instant case, the act of publication took
place as soon as the defendant transmitted the data to the service provide;
and the publication or transmission also took place while the data was
el
received. In case of the viewers from UK, the sending and receiving both
took place in UK, that is, within the jurisdiction of the Court; and it was
irrelevant that the transmission may have left the jurisdiction (for some
time) between the sending and receiving. Arguing thus the Court held
t
that it had the jurisdiction to prosecute the accused for pornography.
Es

According to the facts of the case, the defendant had created

pornographic images, which were illegal under the UKs Obscene
Publications Act. He ran a series of sites based in the US, hosting them
on a US based Internet service provider. These images were accessible to
anyone in the world via the Internet who became a subscriber by giving
credit cards details. He was charging UK customers 25 pounds a month
for access. The subscriber was given a password and could log onto the
various websites to obtain the images.59

i. Judicial response before the IT Act 2000 in India:

59 J.P. Mishra: An introduction to Cyber Laws. Ist Edn: 2012 Central law Publications, p-188).

{300}
 Sukanto Haldar v. State of West Bengal60 case were relating to
magazine Nara Nari which was treated as obscene publication.
Therefore, to give effect to public morality above art, literature the court
under s. 292 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 convicted the petitioner and
sentenced him to two months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200
in default to rigorous imprisonment for two weeks.61

Shaw v. Director of Public Prosecution62 in the UK was related

to a magazine named The Ladies Directory to distribute in market
which contained names, addresses of prostitutes, pornographic

ar
photographs and the descriptions of their practices. The accused was
charged for such pornographic distribution in public as an offence
because it corrupts the mind of people or individuals and this act was
treated by court as a conspiracy to corrupt public morality. The
el
judiciary referred here

(i) John Staurt mills principle of harm to others mentioned in his book
t
On liberty;
Es

(ii) The conclusion of the debate of H.L.A. Hart and Prof. Devline about
enforcement of morality by law where they concluded with the need
of the balance between law and morals and shared morality; and

(iii) The recommendations of the Wolfenden Committees in the year

1957 in the UK which was similar to J.S. Mills principle.

(iv) The Wolfenden Committees recommendations were that while

prostitute and homosexual parties are two consenting adults and
doing something within four walls without hampering others or

60 AIR 1952 Cal 214.

61 M. Dasgupta: Cyber Crime in India, 2009, Eastern Law House Kolkata (Calcutta), p-163.
62 (1961)2 ALL ER 44 B.

{301}
 without causing harm to others, the State shall not enter into
individuals private liberty and the same activities will not be treated
as a crime.

Indian judiciary whole heartedly followed these principles as well

as Hiclin Test and decision of the U.S. Court in Roths case. In Ranjit D.
Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra,63 the Supreme Court of India declared
Lady Chatterleys Lovers written by D.H. Lawrence as obscene book
and publication. The Court held that there is difference between
obscenity and pornography. Precise definitions are not possible.

ar
However, obscenity is any material, which tends to corrupt, cause
annoyance, something of horror, indecent, immoral or with sexual
tendency. Pornography means any material in writing, picture or other
el
form, which is intended to arouse sexual desire. Both are against public
morality and decency.64

Legislation which prohibits obscenity and pornography are

t
laws with moral value and when there is synthesis between law and
morality, the situation will be balanced with shared morality.
Es

ii. Judicial response in India after the Information

Technology Act, 2000:

In Jayesh S. Thakkar v. State of Maharashtra,65 on 29th July

may 2001, the petitioners wrote a letter to the Chief Justice of the
Bombay high Court. The complain of the letter was about pornographic
websites on the internet. The letter was treated as suo motu writ petition.

63 AIR 1965 SC 881; (1965)2 Cr LJ 8.

64 M. Dasgupta: Cyber Crime in India, 2009, Eastern Law House Kolkata (Calcutta), p-162-163.
65 Bombay H.C., Writ Petition No. 1611 of 2001, 28th September.

{302}
 On 26th September 2001, the Division Bench of the Bombay High
Court consisting of B.P. Singh, CJ and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachurd, J.; and
passed an order to appoint a committee to suggest and recommended
ways of preventive and controlling measure and means to protect
children from access to pornographic and obscene material on the
internet.

The committee considered several public opinions through

internet and other media and recommended in a report. The Bombay
high Court Special Committees report on Shielding Minors from Cyber

January 2002 was as follows:

ar
porn i.e., Protecting Minors from Unsuitable Internet Material on 30 th

(1) Site Blocking: The committee comprehensively rejected the

el
proposal for site blocking as being technically and legally unsound.

(2) Cyber Cafes: the Committees recommendations include:

t
(a) A suggested definition of cyber cafes to be included in the rules
under the Bombay Police Act.
Es

(b) Procedures for licensing cyber fares as none are as yet licenced
or regulated.

(c) Regulations requiring cyber caf operators to demand photo

identity cards of any kind from all users.

(d) Requiring that minors be restricted to using machines in the

common open space of cyber cafes i.e., not in cubicles.

(e) Requiring that these machines be fitted with software filters.

{303}
 (f) Providing for the maintenance of internet protocol address
allocation time-stamped logs for all machines in the cyber caf
network.

(3) Service Providers: The recommendations cover

(a) requirements for maintenance of time-stamped logs of different

descriptions;

(b) requirements for synchronization of internal clocks and connectivity

authentication logs.

(4) Educational Measures: These include

ar
(a) Electronic mail and website information to be provided by internet
el
service providers informing the public about hazards and possible
solutions.

(b) Offering filters software to subscribers as an option.

t
(c) Setting up a hotline to the cyber crime investigation cell.
Es

(d) Taking steps to increase awareness about cyber crime in general.

As regards the reported Indian cases on cyber pornography, they

are far and few as most of them are disposed of in the lower Court at the
magisterial level. However, the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas
Katti,66 deserves a special mention in this context since it was disposed
of within a record period of seven months from the date of filing of the
FIR. The credit for expeditious investigation of the case goes to the
Chennai Cyber Crime Cell which produced 18 witnesses and 34

66. Decided by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, on November 5, 2004.

{304}
documents in support of the prosecution case. The facts of the case were
as follows.

The accused Suhas Katti was sending obscene, defamatory and

annoying messages about the complainant, a divorce woman on e-mails
and in the Yahoo Message group. He had opened a false e-mail account
in the name of the victim. The e-mails carried a message that the victim
lady was soliciting and therefore, she was receiving annoying phone calls
from callers to have sex. She filed FIR against the unknown accused in
the Cyber Crime Cell, Chennai. The police investigation revealed that the

ar
accused was a known family friend of the victim who was residing in
Mumbai and was interested in marrying her. She, however, married
another person whom she divorced after sometime, so the accused again
el
started contacting her for marriage with him, to which she declined.
Thereupon, he started harassing her by sending obscene and defamatory
e-mails.
t
The accused was charged under Section 67 of the I.T. Act, 2000
read with Sections 469 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code. He pleaded that
Es

the offensive e-mails might have been sent to the complainant (lady)
either by her ex-husband whom she had divorced or she might have
herself managed to do so in order to implicate the accused because he
had turned down her request to marry her. It was also argued on behalf of
the accused that documentary evidence against him were not sustainable
under Section 65(b) of the Indian Evidence Act. The Court, however,
relied upon the expert witnesses and other evidence before it including
the witnesses of cyber caf owner and convicted the accused for the
offence under Sections 469/509; IPC and Section 67 of the I.T. Act.

{305}
 The accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
2 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 4500/- for the offence under Section 469,
and imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence
under Section 509 of IPC, and a sentence to undergo simple
imprisonment of 2 years and a fine of Rs. 4000/- for an offence under
Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. All the sentences were to
run concurrently.

In Fatima Riswana v. State Represented by ACP, Chennai

67
and other, the appellant was a prosecution witness wherein

ar
respondents 2 to 6 were accused facing trial for the offence of cyber
pornography under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000
read with Section 6 of the Indecent Representation of Woman
el
(Prohibition) Act, 1986 and Section 5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic
(Prevention) Act, 1956 as also under Section 27 of Arms Act, 1959 and
Sections 120-B, 506(ii), 366, 306 and 375, IPC. The accused named Dr.
L. Prakash allegedly exploited certain men and women for the purpose of
t
making pornographic photos and videos in various acts of sexual
Es

intercourse and selling them to foreign websites. The case was tried by
Vth Fast Track Court, Chennai which was presided over by a lady Judge
as that Court happened to be a Mahila Court constituted by the
Government of Tamil Nadu for speedy trial of cases of offences
committed against women.

While the trial was pending before the said Fast Track Court, the
accused filed revision petition against the Court order rejecting their
demand of supply of copies of 74 compact discs (CDs) containing
alleged pornographic material. The revision petition was rejected by

67. Criminal Appeal 63 of 2005 arising out of SLP (Cri) No. 1606 of 2004 decided by the Supreme
Court on January 11, 2005.

{306}
Madras High Court holding supplying such a large number of copies of
CDs was not possible as it may give room for copying such illegal
material for further circulation. The Court, however, permitted the
accused persons to peruse the CDs in the chamber of the Presiding Judge
in the presence of their advocates, the expert and public prosecutor.

The Public Prosecutor and the petitioners Counsel submitted that

it would be embarrassing for them to view the said CDs in the presence
of learned District Judge who was a lady Judge. The High Court
observed that since the accused had not filed any application for transfer

ar
of the said case to some male Judge, it was for the Presiding Lady Judge
to choose whether she wanted to try to case herself or get it transferred to
a male Judge colleague. The High Court, however, transferred the case to
el
Fast Track Court IV which was presided by a male Judge as requested by
the Public Prosecutor but without hearing the petitioner.

The appellant, therefore, moved a criminal revision in 2004

t
contending that the transfer of the case from lady Judge to male Judge
would embarrass the appellant, she being woman. It was also contended
Es

that such transfer was contrary to the object creating Mahila Courts, as
also the earlier decision of the Apex Court. The High Court rejected the
appeal and therefore, the appellant went in appeal before the Supreme
Court.

The Apex Court held that the entire approach of the High Court in
the instant case was against the interest of the witnesses who were really
the victims in the case. The Court further observed that since the
Presiding Lady Judge had not expressed any embarrassment, it was
unreasonable to presume that it would cause here embarrassment, more
so when she had not expressed any desire that the case be transferred to

{307}
 some male Judge. Allowing the appeal, the Apex Court held that the
High Court should not have interfered in the matter.

The Additional District Court and Sessions Court here was upheld
a lower courts verdict in the first cyber case State v. Ts. Balan and
Aneesh Balan68 filed in the State sentencing a Pentecostal Church priest
and his son to rigorous imprisonment in 2006.

Disposing of the appeal filed by the priest T.S. Balan and his son,
Aneesh Balan, against the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

ar
Additional District Judge T.U. Mathewkutty said it was time the
government took effective measures to e court check the growing trend
of cyber crimes in the state. The court upheld the magistrates order
sentencing the two to three-year rigorous imprisonments and imposing a
el
fine of Rs. 25,000 under section 67 of the Information Technology Act;
awarding six months rigorous imprisonment under section 120(B) of the
Indian Penal Code; and ordering one year rigorous imprisonment and
t
imposing a fine of Rs. 10,000 under section 469 of the code. The court
revoked the sentence under Section 66 of the IT Act. Te cyber case dates
Es

back to January-February 2002 and the priest and his son became the first
to be convicted of committing a cyber crime.

The two were found guilty of morphing, web-hosting and e-

mailing nude pictures of Pastor Abraham and his family. Balan had
worked with the pastor until he fell out with him and was shown the door
by the latter. Balan joined the Sharon Pentecoastal later. The prosecution
said the duo had morphed photographs of Abraham, his son, Valsan
Abraham, and daughter, Starla Luke, and e-mailed them from fake mail
IDs with captions. The morphed pictures were put on the web and the

68 Additional District and Session Court, Kerala, 2006.

{308}
accused, who edited a local magazine called The Defender, wrote about
these photos in his publication.

Valsan received the pictures on the Internet and asked his father to
file a complaint to the police. A police party raided the house of Balan
and his son at Perumbavoor and collected evidences. The magistrates
verdict came after a four-year trial, for which the court had to procure a
computer with Internet connection and accessories. The police had to
secure the services of a computer analyst too to piece together the
evidence. Twenty-nine witnesses, including the internet service provider

ar
and Bharat Sanchar Nigam ltd., had to depose before the court.

b. Judicial Response on Child Pornography:

el
Child pornography refers to images or films (also known as child
abuse images) and in some cases writing, depicting sexually explicit
activities involving a child; as such, child pornography is a record of
child sexual abuse. Under the IT Act, 2000 as amended by the ITAA,
t
2008, crime of Child Pornography under 67-B says, whoever publishes or
Es

transmits or causes to be publishes or transmitted material in electronic

form which depicts children engaged in sexually explicit act or conduct
or creates text or digital images, collects, seeks, browses, downloads,
advertises, promotes, exchanges or distributes material in any electronic
form depicting children in obscene or indecent or sexually explicit act or
in a manner that may offend a reasonable adult on the computer resource
or facilitates abusing children online or records in any electronic form
own abuse or that of others pertaining to sexually explicit act with
children is known as child pornography.

{309}
 In United States v. Crandon,69 Richard Crandon pleaded guilty
before the Court for receiving child pornography. His crime was much
more than just downloading the illicit material from the internet. Crandon
met a fourteen year old girl online and ultimately meeting with her to
have sexual relations and took the photographs of that intercourse.
Crandon and the girls use to frequently interact over the telephone and
used to discuss about their future prospects. The girl wanted to go to New
Jersey from Minnesota along with Crandon. They went about
materializing their plan and left for New Jersey form Minnesota. On their

ar
way they came to know that the authorities were looking for them. The
girl was sent from Minnesota. Crandon contested the deprivation of his
access to the Internet during the period of his imprisonment on the
ground that the Court has to seek the prior approval from the probation
el
officer. Further he pleaded that the non accessibility would hinder his
employment and the business wince computers and the internet are
inextricably tied. Court upheld that the restrictions was tenable in the
t
light of the first amendment which related to the protecting the interest of
the public.
Es

In United States v. Hockings, 70 it was held that the computer

graphic interchange files (GIFs) in binary format fall within the definition
of visual depictions. The fact that such files require the use of personal
computers, hardware and software to depict images of child pornography
does not put them outside the statute.

A U.S. court in United States v. Simpson,71 laid down that the

detectives affidavit describing aborted transaction negotiated in Internet

69 494 U.S 152 (1990)

70 129 F. 3D 1069 (9th cir. 1997) U.S.A.
71 152 F. 3d 1241 ( 10th cir. 1998) U.S.A.

{310}
chat room to exchange child pornography was sufficient to constitute
portable cause in obtaining search warrant.

The U.S. District Court of Maryland in United States v.

Mathews, 72 held that each transfer by e-mail of a child pornography
image is a separate offence under federal law. The defendants argument
was rejected by the court who had contended that the successive e-mail
transmission were all part of a single online conversation. The
defendants defence that he was involved in investigative journalism was
also rejected by the court.

ar
In United State v. Gray,73 the court held that child pornography
discovered during a search conducted pursuant to obtaining a warrant for
materials related to computer tampering was admissible. Defendant
el
argued that files with the .JPG extension were presumptively pictures and
not related to subject of search. Court noted that hackers frequently
mislabel files, and FBI agents were not required to take file names at face
t
value.
Es

In State of New York v. BuffNet,74 an Internet service provider

(ISP) pled guilty to the misdemeanor charge of knowingly providing
access to child pornography. A two-year investigation found that ISP,
BuffNet, knowingly hosted a child pornography newsgroup called Pedo
University. The police notified BuffNet that they were hosting illegal
content, yet BuffNet failed to remove the newsgroup from its servers.
Police then seized the ISPs servers. Buffnet was levied a $5000 fine, and
removed the obscene content.

72 F. Supp 2d 656 (D. Md. 1998) U.S.A.

73 78 F. supp.2d 524 (E.D. Va.1999) U.S.A.
74 New York Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department (2001) (USA)

{311}
 In U.S. v. Jesus Norberto Evans-Martinez,75 the defendant was
convicted for sending emails advertising the creation of a Yahoo! Group
for sharing child pornography.

Also, in Jeffrey L. Cashatt v. State, 76 the Court of Appeal of

Florida affirmed conviction against the defendant, who knowingly used a
computer on-line service, Internet service or local bulletin board service
to seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child or a person believed to be a child,
or attempt to do so, in violation of section 847.0135(3), Florida Statutes.

ar
The Airforce Bal Bharti School Case77 was filed in the Juvenile
court, Delhi on the charge of cyber pornography. Some jurists say this is
the first Indian cyber pornographic case which was charge sheeted in the
juvenile court. The brief facts in issue were that a student of the Airforce
el
Bal Bharti School, Lodhi Road, New Delhi was arrested by the Delhi
Police in the year 2001 April.

The alleged accused was then a class XII student who created a
t
pornographic website as revenge of being teased by classmates and
Es

teachers. He listed in that website the name of his 12 schoolmates girls

and teachers in sexually explicit manner. He was then suspended by the
School Authorities though the juvenile court allowed his bail prayer.
However, he was charged under s. 67 of the Information Technology Act
2000, and ss. 292, 293, 294 of the Indian Penal Code and the Indecent
Representation of Women Act. The most significant steps were taken by
the law enforcement agencies in India.

75 05-10280, 448 F.3d 458. (Vakul Sharma: Information Technology, Law and Practice, IIIrd Edn.
Universal Law Publishing Co. new Delhi, p-218).
76 1D02-4638, 873 So. 2d 430. (Vakul Sharma: Information Technology, Law and Practice, IIIrd Edn.
Universal Law Publishing Co. new Delhi, p-218).
77 The Air Force bal Bharti, Delhi Cyber Pornography Case 2001

{312}
 In another case, a Swiss Couple78 in Mumbai would gather slum
children and then force them to appear for nude and obscene
pornography. They would then upload these photographs to websites
specially designed for pedophiles. The Mumbai Police arrested the
couple for pornography and charged them for the offence of cyber
pornography under Section 67 0f the I.T. Act read with Section 292 and
509, IPC. But they were later let off for want of sufficient evidence
against them.

In the case of Avnish Bajaj v. State (NCT Delhi),79 Baazee.com

ar
was an online auction website and Avnish Bajaj was in Chief Executive
Officer (CEO). He was arrested in December, 2004 for distributing cyber
pornographic material. The charges against him arose from the fact that
el
someone had sold copies of pornographic CD through Baazee.com web-
site. The CD was also being sold in the Delhi market. It was as a result of
joint action of Delhi and Mumbai police that the accused was arrested.
However, he was later released on bail by the Delhi High Court as there
t
was no prima facie evidence that Mr. Bajaj directly or indirectly
Es

published the said pornography and the actual obscene recording of chip
could not be viewed on Baazee.com. The investigation in this case
revealed that Bajaj was of an Indian origin and had family ties in India.
His companys web-site i.e. Baazee.com was a customer web-site which
was dealing online sale of property on commission basis. An obscene
MMS clipping A DPS girl having fun was listed for sale on
Baazee.com on November 27, 2004 and some copies of this clipping
were sold by the company.

78 Swiss couple cyber pornography case, Mumbai 2003

79 (2005) 3 Comp. LJ 364 (Delhi). This case is popularly known as Baazee.com case.

{313}
 The accused Mr. Bajaj in his defence pleaded that Section 67 of
the Information Technology Act under which he was charged and
arrested relates to publication of obscene material and not the
transmission of such material. Moreover, having come to know about the
illegal character of the disputed CD, he initiated steps to immediately
stop the sale within 38 hours since the intervening period was a week-
end. He further contended that the said obscene clip could not be viewed
on the portal of Baazee.com and the sale proceeds were not routed
through him.

ar
The question for decision before the Court in this case was to
draw a distinction between internet service provider (ISP) and content
provider. The Court ruled that the burden rests on the accused to prove
el
that he was only the service provider and not the content provider. The
court held that accused deserved to be released on bails as the evidence
showed that the obscene material may have been unwittingly offered for
sale on his companys web-site and there was probability of the alleged
t
crime having been actually committed by some other person. The
Es

accused was, however, ordered to furnish two sureties of one lakh rupees
each and surrender his passport and not to leave India without the
permission of the Court. He was finally enlarged on bail subject to
condition that he shall participate and assist in the investigation.

In Hari Ram v. State of Rajasthan & Another,80 it has been

observed that the law as now crystallized on a conjoint reading of
Sections 2(k), 2(l), 7A, 20 and 49 read with Rules 12 and 98, places
beyond all doubt that all persons who were below the age of 18 years on
the date of the commission of the offences even prior to 1st April, 2001,
would be treated as juvenility was raised after they had attained the age

80 Criminal Appeal No. 907 of 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.3336 of 2006).

{314}
of 18 years on or before the date of commencement of the Act and were
undergoing sentence upon being convicted.

c. Judicial Response on Online Fraud:

The term Internet Fraud is very comprehensive but has not been
specifically defined under the IT Act. This term will possibly include
other crimes also which have been expressly defined in the IT Act. The
frauds through Internet Frauds will take a variety of forms and their
classification cannot be easily maintained. The courts in America are
busy to resolve Internet frauds

ar
United States v. Morris81 is one of the landmark case in the USA
which deals with cyber fraud. Morris, the accused was held guilty of
el
violating Title 18 U.S.C.s. 1030(a)(5)(a) by the Jury in trial. Morris was
authorised to use computers at Cornell, Harvard and Berkeley. He was
authorised to communicate through internet to other computers, computer
system and network. He was authorised to send e-mail, collect
t
informations etc. He transmitted worm which was considered as
Es

exceeding authorised access or unauthorised access. He used send e-mail

and connect other computer and by this way unauthorisedly accessed
other computers in fact, he found holes in programmes which gave scope
to him for a special and unauthorised access route into others computer.
He was sentenced to 3 years of probation, 400 hours of community
service and fined with $ 10,050. He appealed to the Circuit Court against
the decision of the trial court. Section 1030(a)(5)(a) of the Computer
Fraud and Abuse Act 1986 provides that whoever knowingly causes the
transmission of a programme, information, code or command and as a
result of such conduct, intentionally cause damage without authorization

81 928 r. 2d 505 (2nd cir), Cir Court denied, 502 U.S>817 (1991).

{315}
 to a protected computer be punished. Morris contended that his conduct
was almost exceeding authorised access. And the evidence was also not
sufficient to convict him of unauthorised access. The Circuit Judge
Newman affirmed the District Courts judgment.

In the context of on-line cyber frauds, the notorious World Wide

Nigerian Scam82 deserves a special mention. The scam, better known as
Advance Fee Fund (AFF) Nigerian Fraud or the 419 Fraud named after
Section 419 of the Criminal Court of the Nigeria, which is operating in
most of the European and Anglo-American countries since 1980s has

ar
duped the business world to the tune of Billions of US dollars. It is
reported to be the fifth largest industry in Nigeria operated by
unscrupulous business elites under the successive Government of that
el
country. The modus operandi of the scam is as follows:

The victim receives an unsolicited fax, e-mail or letter concerning

Nigeria or any other African nation, mostly from West Africa such as
t
Ghana, Togo, Liberia, Sierra, Leone, Ivory Coast etc; requesting for legal
and legitimate business proposal or service contracts. The victim is asked
Es

to pay an advance fee of some kind which may be in the form of transfer
tax, performance bond or for credit privileges. Once the victim pays
the fee, many more requests for advance payments on one pretext or
another come to the victim until he either decides to quit or runs out of
money, or both.

Alarmed by the widespread Nigerian 419 Fraud the Government

of USA, UK, Canada, South Africa etc. have warned the business
community to be alert and not to respond to 419 letters, instead file a
complaint against the sender with the national law enforcement agency as

82 US Department of State of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (April, 1997).

{316}
also Nigerian Embassy and the Central Bank of Nigeria. Those who have
fallen a pray to such scam may also file a complaint with the Nigerian
Economic and Financial Crimes Commission. In Canada, the regional
offices of the Commercial Crime Branch may be contracted for redressal
and relief. In UK, those effected or cheated by the 419 Advance Fee
Fund Nigerian Scam may forward their complaint to local fraud squad
for investigating quoting NCIS (Western African Organised Crime
Section) in the correspondence. Under no circumstances reply should be
sent to the fraud operators. Anyone outside the UK may also seek help

419 fraud.83

ar
and advice from UK in case he received a 419 letter or falls a victim to

In FTC v. Craig Lee Hare,84 the action was for deceptive trade
practices arising from on-line auction offering sale of computer
el
products that were never delivered. The defendant pleaded guilty to wire
fraud and was sentenced to six months home detention, three years
probation and ordered to pay restitution of over $22,000. He was also
t
barred for life from conducting internet commerce.
Es

In United States v. Middleton, 85 the court held that the term

individual as used in the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, is not
confined to natural persons, but extends to business entities, and hence
damage to an ISP-victim was encompassed under the statute.

In United States v. Hoke,86 a suit was filed against Gray Hoke for
disseminating misinformation on a counterfeit Bloomberg News Service
Web page regarding an alleged merger between his employer PairGain

83 The London Metropolitan Police website maintains an excellent section on 419 Advance Fee Fund
(AFF) Fraud.
84 S.D. Fla. 4/*/98 (USA)
85 35 F. Supp. 2d 1189 (N.D. Cal. 1999) (USA)
86 Magistrate No. 99-889M (C.D. Cal. 4/14/99) (USA)

{317}
 Technology, Inc. and ECI Telecom Ltd. Initial investigation by the FBI
revealed that Hoke might use services of Angelfire.com to host the page
and Hotmail email service. Hoke was traced by IP addresses from these
services. Hoke pled guilty and was sentenced to five months of home
detention, five years probation, and restitution of $93,086.77.

In U.S. v. Pirello,87 the defendant was found fraudulently setting

computers online. He had placed four advertisements on Internet
classified ads websites, soliciting buyers for computers. Pierllo received
three orders, deposited the money in his personal bank account, and

ar
never delivered computers. The court held defendant liable for fraud by
using the Internet website to solicit orders for non-existent computers.

The Sony.Sambandh.com Case (2002) was the first cyber-

el
related fraud case in which the accused was convicted. This case has sent
out a message that the provisions of the Indian Penal Code can be
effectively applied to certain categories of cybercrimes which are not
t
covered under the Information Technology Act, 2000. The complainant,
Sony India Private Ltd. was running a website called
Es

www.sony.sambandh.com enabled non-resident Indians to send Sony

products to their relatives and friends in India after they make online
payment for the products.88

In May, 2002, someone logged on to the website under the

identity of Ms. Barbara Campa and ordered a Sony coloured TV set and a
cordless headphone. She gave her credit card number for payment and
requested the product to be delivered to Arif Azim in Noida. The
payment was cleared by the complainant Sony India Ltd. Who delivered
the items to Arif Azim after following the relevant procedure of due

87 255 F. 3d 728 (9th Cir. 2001) U.S.A.

88 V. Paranjape, Cyber Crimes & Law, Central law Agency, 2010, p-137.

{318}
diligence. It also took a digital photography showing the delivery being
accepted by Arif Azim.

Nearly one and a half month after this transaction, the credit card
agency informed Sony (India) company that it was an unauthorised
fraudulent transaction as the real owner had denied having made the
purchase. Thereupon, the company lodged a complaint for online
cheating to the CBI which registered a case against Arif Azim under
Section 418, 419, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

ar
The investigation of the case revealed that the accused Arif Azim
who was working at a cal center at Noida gained access to the credit card
number of an American national, which he had misused on the
companys website. The CBI recovered the coloured TV and cordless
el
headphone from Arif Azim. The Court on the basis of evidence of
witnesses and material before it found Arif Azim guilty of offence under
Section 418, 419, 420, IPC and convicted him for cyber fraud and
t
cheating. However, in view of the young age of the accused i.e. 24 years
and this being his first conviction, the Court ordered his release on
Es

probation for a period of one year.

In Pune Citibank MphasiS Call Center Fraud, 89 some ex

employees of BPO arm of MPhasis Ltd MsourcE, defrauded US
Customers of Citi Bank to the tune of RS 1.5 crores has raised concerns
of many kinds including the role of "Data Protection". The crime was
obviously committed using "Unauthorised Access" to the "Electronic
Account Space" of the customers. It is therefore firmly within the domain
of "Cyber Crimes". ITA-2000 is versatile enough to accommodate the

89 The Times of India, 24th April 2005. See also http://www.ecommercetimes .com/story/42112.html.

{319}
 aspects of crime not covered by ITA-2000 but covered by other statutes
since any IPC offence committed with the use of "Electronic Documents"
can be considered as a crime with the use of a "Written Documents".
Cheating", "Conspiracy", "Breach of Trust" etc are therefore applicable
in the above case in addition to section in ITA-2000. Under ITA-2000 the
offence is recognized both under Section 66 and Section 43. Accordingly,
the persons involved are liable for imprisonment and fine as well as a
liability to pay damage to the victims to the maximum extent of Rs 1
crore per victim for which the "Adjudication Process" can be invoked.

ar
In yet another case, i.e. Infinity e-search (Gurgaon BPO),90 a
young person Karan Bahari aged 24 years was working for a Gurgaon
based website designing and online marketing firm Infinity e-search. He
el
was alleged to have fraudulently sold information on 1000 bank accounts
of British customers from an Indian call centre to an undercover British
journalist working for a British newspaper, The Sun for 2750 pounds.
The employee karan, however, denied the charge and claimed that he was
t
only a middleman and that he did not sell data collected by his employer
Es

i.e. Infinity e-search company. The company also denied any

involvement in the case as it did not handle any data for the bank named
in the said newspaper and that his employee Karan Bahari did not have
access to confidential data of any kind.

In this case, it was alleged that the British journalist for The Sun
used Karan Bahari who was working in the Infinity e-search, as an
intermediately, offered him a job and requested for a presentation on a
CD and later claimed that the CD contained confidential data about
thousand bank accounts of British customers who were customers from
an Indian call centre. However, on investigation, the fact that the CD

90 Decided by Delhi High Court on June 24, 2005.

{320}
contained such data could not be substantiated by the journalist and
therefore, the charges of fraud could not be proved against Karan Bahari
or his employer i.e. the infinity e-search company. But the case has raised
on apprehension that there is possibility of an anti out-sourcing backlash
if Indian online companies do not take sufficient care of the data which
they handle.

The Supreme Courts ruling in the Morgan Stanleys case91 has

been instrumental in augmenting Business processing Outsourcing (BPO)
with a view to creating a global safe-deposit vault to halt data theft and

ar
improve Indias prospects as an outsourcing destination. The National
Association of Software and Services Companies (NASSCOM)
announced setting up an independent watchdog self regulatory
el
organization (SRO) in April, 2007 for setting out data security standards
for the software industry with focus on global practices.

d. Judicial Response on Credit Card Fraud:

t
Credit card fraud is a wide ranging term for theft and fraud
Es

committed using a credit card or any similar payment mechanism as a

fraudulent source of funds in a transaction. The purpose may be to obtain
goods without paying, or to obtain unauthorised funds from an account.

The credit card frauds have assumed dangerous proportion

throughout the globe. In USA, the ten most frequent fraud reports involve
undelivered services, damaged, defective, misrepresented or undelivered
merchandise, auction sales, pyramid schemes and bogus marketing of
goods and of the most predominant among them is credit card fraud. It is
estimated that half of a billion dollars are lost by the consumers through
credit card frauds.

91 DIT (International Taxation) Mumbai v. Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc. decided on July 9, 2007

{321}
 In Delhi Credit Card Fraud Case, 92 Court of Metropolitan
Magistrate Delhi found guilty a 24 year old engineer working in a call
centre, of fraudulently gaining the details of Campas credit card and
bought a television and a cordless phone from Sony website.
Metropolitan Magistrate Gulshan Kumar convicted Azim for cheating
under sections 418, 419, 420 of the IPC, but did not send him to jail.
Instead, Azim was asked to furnish a personal bond of Rs. 20,000 and
was released on a years probation.

In Hotel Le Meridien, Pune Case, 93 almost 30 customers of

ar
Hotel Le Meridien, Pune were cheated. Four persons were creating
duplicate credit cards from those belonging to customers and then using
them to make purchases. One of the person was a cashier at the Chingari
el
Restaurant in Hotel Le Meridien, and he used credit card skimmers and
readers which recorded details of the credit card being swiped. These
details were then copied on blank cards with magnetic strips. Altogether
they used 33 cards of 27 banks among themselves to go on a shopping
t
spree, with the total amount of such purchases being pegged at Rs. 1
Es

crore. The type of cards being targeted were the higher end ones, namely,
Gold, Titanium, Platinum and corporate cards, where the credit limit was
higher. This came to light when a Citibank employee went to the hotel
with some friends and lodged a police complaint after getting his card bill
with exorbitant purchases that he had no idea about.

e. Judicial Response on Defamation:

Every person has a right to have his reputation preserved inviolate. This
right of reputation is acknowledged as an inherent personal right or every

92 Advocate, Prashant Mali: Cyber Law & Cyber Crimes, Ist Edn. 2012, Snow White Publications. P-
60.
93 Ibid.

{322}
person. It is a jus in rem, a right good against the entire world. A mans
reputation is his property, more valuable than other property.94

According to Wikipedia, Cyber Defamation is a crime conducted

in cyberspace, usually through the Internet, with the intention of
defaming others. Sending defamatory email, writing derogatory
comments on facebook, orkut or other social networking sites also
constitutes cyber defamation. The Internet can be used to spread
misinformation, just as easily as information. Websites can present false
or defamatory information, especially in forums and chat rooms, where

ar
users can post messages without verification by moderators. Minors are
increasingly using web forums and social networking sites where such
information can be posted as well. Criminal behavior can include the
el
publication of intimate photographs or false information about sexual
behaviours.

In the American case of Cubby Inc. v. CompuServe Inc. 95

t
action was brought by the plaintiff company against the defendant
company CompuServe for its alleged publication of defamatory libel and
Es

unfair business tactics through computer network. The District Court held
that, the computer service that provides subscribers with access to
electronic news or publication put together by independent third party
and loaded into companys computer website was a mere distribution of
information for which it could not be held liable for defamatory
statements made in the said news or publications unless it is shown that
computer company knew or had reason to believe of the existence of
such defamatory contents. The court further ruled that just as a public
library, bookstore or news stand does not have any editorial control over

94 Dixon v. Holden, (1869) LR 7 Eq 488.

95 (1991) 776 F. Supp. 135 (USA)

{323}
 the publications it distributes so also a computer company does not have
any control over the publications it distributes so also a computer
company does not have any control over its publications nor is it feasible
for it to examine the contents of any publication and see if it carries any
defamatory statements.

The High Court noted that computer technology is rapidly

transforming the information industry and a computerized database is the
functional equivalent of a traditional news vendor or distributor.
Therefore, it cannot be held liable for defamatory contents of the

ar
publication unless it is shown that it had the knowledge or knowledge or
reason to believe about the existence of such libelous contents thereof.

The decision in the Cubbys case 96 was reaffirmed by the

el
Supreme Court of New York in Stratton Oakmont v. Prodigy,97 and it
was reiterated that Computer Bulletin Boards are just like books stores or
libraries. But in the instant case, the defendant Prodigy had his own
t
policies and technologies relating to posting on the bulletin boards which
charged the character of his computer services from distributor to that of
Es

a publisher and therefore, it had to accept liability for legal consequences

flowing out of the defamatory statements made against the plaintiff.

In Firth v. State of New York, 98 the plaintiff claimed that

publication of an alleged libel on the internet was continuous
publication, which would extend the statute of limitation. The court held
that the statutes would run from the date the material was first posted,
rather than continuously. On October 29, 2001, the New York Appellate
Division Court affirmed the decision.

96 Ibid.
97 (1995) NY Misc. Lexis 229 (US)
98 N.Y. Court of Claims, March 2000 (USA)

{324}
 In Norway v. Tvedt,99 the accused was the founder of a far right
group in Norway. He was convicted for posting racist material that mixed
neo-Nazism, racial hatred, and religion, on a website. He was held
responsible for the material despite the fact that it was posted on a server
that was based in the United States.

The Indian Penal Code, 1860 also highlights that defamatory

statement need to be published (or communicated). The Supreme Court
held in Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India100 that publication
means dissemination and circulation. That is, communicating

ar
defamatory statements only to the person defamed is not publication.

The landmark case of S.M.C. Pneumatics (India) Pvt. Ltd. v.

Jogesh Kwatra101 was the first case of cyber defamation in India, the
el
High Court of Delhi assumed jurisdiction and passed an order of ex-parte
injunction against the defendant restraining him from damaging the
reputation of the corporate entity, of which he was an ex-employee. The
t
accused Jogesh Kwatra was sending derogatory, defamatory, obscene,
vulgar, filthy and abusive e-mails to his employers and Managing
Es

Director Mr. R.K. Malhotra in order to malign the high reputation of the
company and its subsidiaries all over India and abroad. The plaintiffs
contended that such defamatory e-mails by the defendant were in blatant
violation of their legal right and the motive of the defendant in sending
such defamatory e-mails was to retaliate against the termination of his
services of by the management of the company. On the basis of evidence
produced before the Court, the defendant was found guilty of cyber
defamation therefore; the High Court of Delhi passed an ex-parte ad

99 Asker and Baerum District Court (Norway, 2002) (NORWAY)

100 (1972) 2 SCC 788.
101. Petition No. 1276/2001 decided by the Delhi High Court in 2003.

{325}
 interim injunction against the defendant restraining him from sending the
said defamatory, obscene, vulgar and abusive messages.

In Gremach Infrastructure Equipment and Projects Limited

and Others v. Google India Private Limited, 102 Google Inc. is the
owner of the popular blogging platform Blogpost. Blogpost hosted a blog
by one toxicwriter (a pseudonym chosen by the blogger to mask his/her
identity). The writer had allegedly written certain defamatory comments
about an Indian Mining Company. The Bombay High Court found the
posting prima facie defamatory and ordered Google to reveal

ar
toxicwriters identity. This is only the interim order. It is unclear as to
whether the company has asked for damages against Google (and
whether safe harbors will come into play).
el
Google seeked to comply with the order as not only the blog
which was available at www.toxicwriter.blogpost.com but also its cache
is available on Google. A few snapshots though were made available on
t
another website. Free Speech and Privacy issue notwithstanding Google
may give the identifying information of the blogger. The reason for this
Es

is its own privacy policy. It stated that, [w]e have a good faith belief that
access, use, prevention or disclosure of such information is reasonably
necessary to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or
enforceable governmental request.

103
In Tata Sons v. Greenpeace International, Justice S.
Ravindra Bhat, authoring the judgment noted that, though the internet has
a wider reach and potential for injury, traditional standards for the grant
of injunctions in cases of libel will be applicable. The court reasoned that
these traditional standards are well developed and there is no

102 508/2008 Bombay HC, Order passed by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud.

103 HC IA 9089/2010 in CS (OS) 1407/2010.

{326}
constitutional mandate which allows the court to create a differentiation.
If this reasoning is strictly applied it would mean that the conventional
rules of defamation. If applied liberally, courts may in cases of a
legislative vacuum, apply other developed legal principles without
differentiation. [Cyber defamation Injunction not granted].

In the case of Tata Sons vs. Turtle International, the Delhi High
Court has held that publication is a comprehensive term, embracing all
forms and mediums including the Internet. That an internet
publication has wider viewership, or a degree of permanence, and greater

ar
accessibility, than other fixed (as opposed to intangible) mediums of
expression does not alter the essential part, i.e. that it is a forum or
medium. There is much sense to have more defined criteria taking into
el
account the nature of the internet content. Injunctions on internet content
should not be readily granted (especially ex-parte) since, firstly the
internet is an easy, self publishing platform providing a medium of
expression for marginal individuals not having corporatist outlets.
t
Secondly, the internet facilitates the distribution of content for a minor
Es

cost to a vast audience. Both the alleged injury and the free speech
concern are greater due to the wider dissemination of the content. These
are only some of the concerns which set the internet apart and it is
desirable to have a nuanced appreciation.

f. Judicial Response in Protection of Intellectual Property

Rights:

The judiciary has always responded to the need of the changing

scenario in regard to development of technologies. It has used its own
interpretative principles to strike a balance between the age-old rigid laws
and the advanced technological knowledge. Internet and other

{327}
 information technologies have brought with them certain issues which
were not foreseen by the legal regime earlier. Various new developments
leading to different kinds of cybercrime unforeseen by the Parliament
have come to fore in the new millennium. As regards the internet related
IPR disputes arising as a result of development of computer science, the
courts have played a role of an umpire between the contesting litigants so
as to ensure that no injustice is caused to anyone.

The concept of intellectual property comprises a bundle of rights.

Any unlawful act by which the owner is deprived completely or partially

ar
of his rights, is an offence punishable under Section 43 of the
Information Technology Act, 2000. Software piracy is a common form
of IPR violation. Some other IPR violations include copyright
el
infringement, trademark and service mark violation, theft of computer
source code etc. The relevant case law indicating judicial trend in regard
to online IPR violations and offences are briefly discussed in the
succeeding paragraphs.
t
In Himalaya Drug Co. v. Sumit,104 the plaintiffs were engaged in the
Es

manufacture and sale of Ayurvedic medicinal preparations and had

developed a website under the domain name www.himalayadrugco.com.
They had spent considerable time, labour, skill and money in preparing
database of more than 209 herbs. It came to the notice of the plaintiffs
that the defendants were operating a website which reproduced the
plaintiffs entire herbal database by copying the preliminary information
of each herb and the detailed monograph, so much so that even the
synthetically and grammatical form that appeared on the appellants
website was copied verbatim by the defendant in their website.

104. 2006 (32) PTC 112 (Del).

{328}
 The appellants, therefore, moved the Delhi High Court for an
injunction alleging that the defendants were passing off their business
using the similar domain name as that of the appellants which was
causing deception and confusion among the consumers and the public.
The defendants having failed to respond and attend the Court despite
several notices, the High Court of Delhi proceeded ex-parte against the
defendants and ordered a permanent injunction restraining them from
reproducing, using and/or communicating to public on their herbal
website which they had copied from the appellants database. The Court

ar
also awarded punitive damages to the extent of eight lakhs rupees, which
the defendants were required to pay to the plaintiff by way of
compensation.
el
i. Judicial Response in Protection of Trademark:

In the case of Kirloskar Disel Reconstruction (P) Ltd. v. Kirloskar

Proprietary Ltd.,105 the High Court of Bombay held that the definition
t
of trademark includes within it the word mark, which mean name and
therefore, the term trademark in Section 105 (c) of the Trademarks Act
Es

must be considered to a comprehensive term including within it the trade

name, or the business name and the name by which the article or goods
are sold. Obviously, there should be a reasonable nexus between the
mark used in relation to the goods and the person claiming right to the
use of that mark. In this case, the Court restrained the defendant from
using the trade name Kirloskar for their proprietary companies as there
was likelihood of confusion or deception of the public resulting in
damage to the plaintiff. In other words, a passing off action would lies in
cases of trademark or trade name violation. The defendant was therefore,

105 AIR 1996 Bombay. 149.

{329}
 restrained from using the name Kirloskar in their online advertisements
and internet communications.

In Banyan Tree Holding (P) ltd. v. A. Murlikrishna Reddy,106

the High Court of Delhi held that in a commercial transaction entered
into by the defendant with internet users located within the jurisdiction of
the forum Court, there is no possibility of solitary trap-transaction
because it will not be a case of purposeful availing.

In the instant case, the plaintiff was operating his business from

ar
Singapore whereas the defendant was using Banyan Tree holding
trademark in dealing with customers on internet. In a passing off action
against the defendant the Single Judge deferred the matter to the Division
Bench on ground that plaintiff and defendant both were not within the
el
jurisdiction of the present Court. It was contented on the behalf of the
plaintiff that the Court has the jurisdiction for passing off action
universally where the matter relates to dealing on internet and the
t
defendant had purposefully availed himself of the jurisdiction of the
forum Court to defeat plaintiffs claim. The Division Bench allowed the
Es

appeal and held that it had the jurisdiction because the internet user was
located within its jurisdiction. The defendant was therefore, restrained
from using the plaintiffs trade name on internet.

In the case of TATA & Sons v. A.K. Choudhri,107 the petitioners

used TATA logo in its website for its products. They sued the defendant
for openly selling his steel and cutlery and similar items using
deceptively similar trademark on the website, and prayed the Court for an
injunction directing the respondent to refrain from selling their products
using brand name similar to that of the petitioners. Allowing the petition,

106Civil Suit (CS) (OS) No. 894/2008 decided by Delhi High Court on November 23, 2009.
107 2009 (40) PTC 54 (Del).

{330}
the High Court of Delhi ruled that petitioners trademark had acquired
unique goodwill and reputation and it had become a distinctive trademark
within the meaning of Section 9 of the Trademarks Act due to its long
continuity. Therefore, the court prohibited the defendant from using the
trademark under Section 29 (4) of the Act although it was not being used
by the respondent for commercial purposes.

ii. Judicial Response on Software Piracy

Software piracy is unauthorised copying and use of Software

ar
without proper license, simultaneous use of single user license software
by multiple users or loading of single user license software at multiple
sites, also amounts to software piracy. It is not possible to completely
eliminate Software piracy, but the same can be controlled by enforcing
el
the laws and generating awareness in the society. Under the IT Act, 2000
as amended by Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008,
According to Section 66, any accused who has committed software
t
piracy shall be liable to pay damages by way of compensation to the
person so affected also the affected person can file a Criminal Complaint
Es

under Section 66-B of Copyright Act, 1957 and under Section 120B, 420,
468 & 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in the nearest Police Station
where the above crime has been committed.

Whelam Association Inc, v. Jaslow Dental Laboratory Ltd.108,

is considered as a landmark judgment on software piracy. Answering in
the affirmative, the Court held that the non-literal elements of a computer
program are not copyrightable because the purpose of the program would
be idea and everything else would be a part of expression, which is
copyrightable. In this case, the court held that it is not necessary for the

108 (3rd. Cir. 1986) 797 F2d 1222 (US).

{331}
 computers programs purpose or function including its structure,
sequences and organization.

In Autodesk, Inc. and Another v. Mr. Prashant Deshmukh and

Others,109 the court raised concerns about increasing instances of privacy
of software of reputed companies such as Microsoft and AutoCAD in the
country, which might cause discouragement amongst the investors in the
development of such software in the lack of dwindling license fees.
Furthermore, the use of pirated software for commercial rather than
personal purposes should, according to the court, be more heavily

ar
frowned upon, and therefore the court awarded the plaintiffs the
permanent injunction sought for as also punitive damage amounting to
Rs. 1 lakh against defendant.
el
iii. Judicial Response on Copyright Violation:

Copyright infringement (or copyright violation) is the

unauthorised or prohibited use of works covered by copyright law, in a
t
way that violates one of the copyright owners exclusive rights, such as
Es

the right to reproduce or perform the copyrighted work, or to make

derivative works.

In Lotus Development Corporation v. Pareerback Software

International, 110 it was held that commuter programs like any other
works are copyrightable.

A & M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. 111 was a landmark

intellectual property case in which the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit affirmed the ruling of the United States District Court

109 Advocate, Prashant Mali: Cyber Law & Cyber Crimes, Ist Edn. 2012, Snow White Publications.
P-106.
110 (1990) 240 F. Supp. 37 (US).
111 239 F.3d 1004 (2001) (US).

{332}
for the Northern District of California, holding that defendant, peer-to-
peer (P2P) file-sharing service Napster, could be held liable for
contributory infringement and vicarious infringement of the plaintiffs
copyrights. This was the first major case to address the application of
copyright laws to peer-to-peer file-sharing.

Taj Television v. Rajan Mandal & Others112 is a landmark case

on copyright violation. The Delhi High Court granted a path-breaking
order authorizing a court appointing a commissioner to enter the premises
of any cable operator in India and record evidence of any unauthorised

ar
telecast of the FIFA World Cup football matches.

In the present case, the Plaintiff, Taj Television Ltd., based in

Dubai, owned and operated an exclusive sports channel by the name of
el
TEN SPORTS. The Plaintiff had acquired the exclusive rights to the
telecast of the FIFA World Cup Football matches for India and certain
other South Asian countries, from Kirch Sports, an entity that had in-turn
t
acquired the worldwide rights from FIFA. Ten Sports was being
broadcasted from Dubai in an encrypted form and could be received by
Es

only those cable operators with a decoder.

In Dalgit Titus, Advocate and others v. Alfred A. Adevare and

others113 decided by the Delhi high Court, the plaintiffs were running a
law firm which consisted of advocates specialized in different fields. The
defendants were working with the plaintiffs firm and were paid
remuneration while they retained control over the professional
organization. They claimed copyright over the work which they had done
while working in the plaintiffs legal firm. The plaintiffs, on the other
hand, contended that since the defendants were a part and parcel of the

112 FSR 22, 2003 Delhi High Court.

113 2006 (32) PTC 112 (Del).

{333}
 plaintiffs firm, they could not claim exclusive right in respect of
database of the list of clients and the expert opinions and advice rendered
to them as they were under an obligation to maintain confidentiality. The
plaintiff also claimed to have spent substantial amount of money, time,
skill, computer network, law library, office infra-structure etc.

Consequent to this dispute which arose regarding the copyright

ownership between the plaintiffs and the defendants, the plaintiffs filed a
complaint before the Court that one of the defendants came to their office
after the office hours and downloaded 7.2 GB of database of their crucial

ar
data, write-up through plaintiffs local area network and allegedly have
stolen the hard copies compressed over ten proprietary drafts of the
plaintiffs and therefore, they prayed for protection of their exclusive data
el
under the Indian Copyright Act, 1957.

After hearing both the parties, the Court came a conclusion that
plaintiff had prima facie in the database which the defendants had taken
t
away from the plaintiffs office. The Court noted that the defendants
were free to carry on their legal profession, utilizes the skill and
Es

information they had mentally acquired by experience gained from

working with the plaintiffs legal firm but restrained them from copying
material of the plaintiff in which the plaintiffs alone had the exclusive
copyright. The principle of law laid down in the case clearly envisages
the need for a careful drafting of different clauses of the contracts before
entering into any kind of relationship, particularly the clause dealing with
database and in case of a legal firm, whenever an employee of a solicitor
firm drafts a document, the employer is the first owner of the copyright
document.114

114 Narayanan on copyright and Industrial Design (3rd ed.) para 6 and 28.

{334}
 In Hindustan Times v. www.legalpundits.com., 115 a recent
decision that has ramifications on free distribution of online content, the
Delhi High Court passed an ex-parte interim injunction against the
website for carrying and forwarding articles published by Hindustan
Times (HT) Media group. The Website www.legalpundits.com, was
allegedly found to have been picking new items from HTs online
portals. Further, the website was found to be forwarding the content to
the public without any consent, authorization or license of the content
owner, HT media group, and that too for final considerations.

ar
HT media group had moved to the court against the websites on
grounds of copyright infringement, trademark violation and unfair trade
practice. HT Media also claimed damages of INR 20 lakh from
el
Legalpundits, in the complaint.

The case Microsoft Corporation v. Yogesh Papat, Delhi High

Court.116 Concerns the infringement of copyright in software and notably
t
the interpretation of section 51 and 55 of the Copyright Act, 1957. Te
Microsoft Corporation, the registered proprietor of the trademark
Es

MICROSOFT, requested a permanent injunction restraining the

defendant, its directors and agents from copying, selling, offering for
sale, distributing or issuing to the public counterfeit or unlicensed version
of Microsofts software program in any manner that amounts to
infringement of Microsofts copyright in the computer programs, related
manuals and Microsofts registered trademarks. Microsoft also requested
that the defendant be prevented from selling and disturbing any product
to which the trademark MICROSOFT or any variants of this trademark
have been applied.

115 2011 Delhi, HC cited in Advocate, Prashant Mali: Cyber Law & Cyber Crimes, Ist Edn. 2012,
Snow White Publications. P-65
116 Ibid. P-273.

{335}
 The defendant did not appear before the court, so the proceedings
took place ex parte. The court eventually ruled against the defendant,
who was downloading Microsoft software onto the hard drives of
computers that if then sold, without a licence or permission to do so from
Microsoft.

The court approached each piece of evidence in turn and, based on

the assumption that 100 computers were sold each year and on the
evidence of the softwares popularity, held that Microsoft had suffered a
total profit loss of Rs 1.98 million, plus interest at 9% from the date of

ar
the decree of until the date of payment.

The court, quoting an observation by Justice Laddie in the High

Court of England and Wales in Microsoft Corporation v. Electrowide
el
Ltd,117 held that the defendants action constituted a general threat to
infringe the copyright in the class of software. Justice Pradeep
Nandrajog, who presided in the case, stated that:
t
It stands established that the defendant has infringed the
Es

plaintiffs copyright by making illicit copies of the operating systems

software by openly systems software openly copying whatever operating
system is currently saleable.

g. Judicial Response on Cyber Squatting:

USA has passed an Act known as Anti-Cyber Squatting

Consumer Protection Act 1999 to deal with this problem. Cyber squatting
according to the United States federal law known as the Anti-cyber
squatting protection act, is registering, trafficking in, or using a domain
name with bad faith internet to profit from the goodwill of a trademark

117 Ibid.

{336}
belonging to someone else. The cyber squatter then offers to sell the
domain to the person or company who owns a trademark contained
within the name at an inflated price.118

In Playboy Enterprises Inc v. Asia Focus International, 119

defendant Asia Focus international maintained website using the domain
names asian-playmates.com and playmates-asian.com in connection with
pictures of adult nude women and related merchandise. Determining that
the playboy mark deserves a high degree of protection as a strong mark,
the court that decided that the use of the two domain names infringed on

ar
playboys playmate trademark. The court emphasized the similarity of
the goods and service offered and indicated that the difference between
the registered mark playmate and the domain names were minimal. In
determining the use of the domain name also diluted the playmate
el
mark, the court focused on the intent of the defendant.

In Panavision v. Toeppen,120 Dennis Toeppen had registered a

t
multitude of domain names incorporating famous trademarks including
Panavision.com. When contacted by Panavision, owner of the trademark,
Es

he offered to sell the domain name to them for USD 13,000. Toeppen had
previously offered similar sales to other trademark owners for domain
names incorporating their marks (Intermatic and American Standard).
Panavision filed suit claiming trademark dilution. Toeppen argued that
the requirements for dilution were not met because his use of the domain
name to display the city of Pana, it did not constitute commercial use.
The court determined that Toeppens business is to register trademarks as
domain names and then sell them to the rightful trademark owners. As

118 Karnika Seth: Cyber Laws in the Information Technology Age, Edn. Ist 2009, Lexis Nexis
Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur, p- 452.
119 1998 WL 724000 (EDVa) USA
120 141 F 3d 1316 (9th Cir 4/17/98) USA

{337}
 such, they found the requisite commercial use. Panavision establishes the
principle in cyber squatting cases that a offer to sell a domain name to the
trademark holder constitutes use in commerce purpose of trademark
infringement. Establishing commercial use, however, is not sufficient.
The plaintiff must also show that there has been dilution. Here the ninth
Circuit indicates that a court need not rely on the traditional definitions of
blurring or tarnishment to find dilution. Because Toeppens conduct
diminished the capacity of the Panavision marks to identify and
distinguish Panavisions goods and services on the Internet, the court

ar
finds that dilution has occurred. While this is one of the older case and its
interpretations have been questioned by scholars, it has frequently been
relied on by courts throughout the US in subsequent cases.

Yahoo Inc. v. Aakash Arora,121 was the first case in India with
el
regard to cybersquatting, where the defendant launched a website nearly
identical to the plaintiffs renowned website and also provided similar
services. Here the court ruled in favour of trademark rights of U.S. based
t
Yahoo. Inc (the Plaintiff) and against the defendant, that had registered
Es

itself as YahooIndia.com. The court observed, it was an effort to trade

on the fame of yahoos trademark. A domain name registrant does not
obtain any legal right to use that particular domain name simply because
he has registered the domain name, he could still be liable for trademark
infringement.

The Bombay High Court in Rediff Communication v.

Cyberbooth & Another122 observed that the value and importance of a
domain name is like a corporate asset of a company. In this case the

121 1999 (19) PTC 201 (Del.).

122 2000 PTC 209, Bombay High Court.

{338}
defendant had registered a domain name radiff.com which was similar to
redifff.com. The court gave a decision in favour of the plaintiff.

In Bennett Coleman & Co Ltd. v. Steven S Lalwani and Benett

Coleman & co Ltd. v. Long Distance Telephone Company, 123 the
arbitration panel gave a decision in favour of the plaintiff. In this to the
respondent had registered domain names www.theeconomictimes.com
and the www.timesofindia.com with network solutions of the United
States. These two names are similar to the names of the Plaintiffs
websites www.theeconomictimes.com and the www.timesofindia.com.

ar
Another important fact was that the respondents websites using the
domain names in contention redirect the users to a different website
www.indiaheadlines.com which provided India related news.
el
In Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. v. Ajay Kumar,124 the M&M
company lodged complaint against the cyber squatter Ajay Kumar that
the latter was using formers domain name mahindra.com and has
t
transferred his original address in India to one in the United States in
order to escape the jurisdiction of the Indian Courts. Disposing of the
Es

complaint, the WIPO arbitration centre (World Intellectual Property

Organisations arbitration centre) upheld the claim of M&M. Earlier also
M&M had to move the WIPO centre for taking back their domain names
mahindra.net and mahindre.org from the same respondent (Ajay Kumar)
in which they had succeeded. The contention of Mahindra & Mahindra in
this case was the trademark Mahindra had been registered both in India
as well as in United States. The WIPOs penalists decided in favour of
Mahindra & Mahindra and held that mahindre.com was identical to the
trademark Mahindra to which the respondent had no right.

123 Cases no. D2000-0014 and 2000-0015, WIPO.

124 AIR 2002 Sc 117: 2002 II SCC 147.

{339}
 In Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions,125 the Respondent
had registered domain names www.sifynet.com and www.siffynet.com.
Satyam (Plaintiff) had an image in the market and had registered the
name Sifynet and various other name with ICANN and WIPO. The word
Sify was first coined by the plaintiff using elements from its corporate
name Satyam Infoway and had a very wide reputation and goodwill in
the market. The Supreme Court held that domain names are business
identifiers, serving to identify and distinguish the business itself or its
goods and services and to specify its corresponding online location. The

ar
court also observes that domain name has all the characteristics of a
trademark and an action of Passing off can be found where domain
names are involved. The decision was in the favour of the plaintiff.
el
h. Judicial Response on Phishing:

According to Wikipedia phishing means, in the field of computer

security, phishing is the criminally fraudulent process of attempting to
t
acquire sensitive information such as username, passwords and credit
card details by masquerading as a trustworthy entity in an electronic
Es

communication. Phishing is the fraudulent acquisition, through

deception, of sensitive personal information such as passwords and credit
cards details, by masquerading as someone trustworthy with a real need
for such information. It is a form of social engineering.

Under the IT Act, 2000 as amended by Information Technology

(Amendment) Act, 2008 Section 66-D is applicable and Section 379 &
420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 are also applicable.

125 2004 (6) SCC 145,

{340}
 In State v. Johnson Nwanonyi and Michel Obiorahmuozboa,
Anambra State in Nigeria,126 a local court in Malappuram district in
Kerala sentenced two Nigerians to five years rigorous imprisonment on
July 20, 2011 in a cyber crime case. The two had cheated a doctor in the
district of Rs. 30 lakh about two years ago. Johnson Nwanonyi (32) and
Michel Obiorahmuozboa (340, both hailing from Anambra state in
Nigeria, were sentenced each other section 420 (cheating)- 5 years, and
468 (forgery)- 5years of IPC and section 66D (phishing) of Information
Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008-2 years and a fine of Rs. 1.25 lakh

district. The sentence would run concurrently.

ar
by a Chief judicial Magistrate V Dileep in Manjeri in Malappuram

According to the charges filed by the Karipur police, the duo had
el
cheated the doctor Dr. C. Chomas, hailing from Valluvambram in
Malappuram district after they sent an e-mail inviting application to
recover a huge sum of unclaimed money left behind by a Nigerian
businessman. They had advertised that the money, kept aside for
t
charitable hospital, was lying unclaimed in a bank. When the doctor
Es

responded to the e-mail, they tricked him by asking to pay Rs. 30 lakh as
processing fee. But a planned move by the police and the doctor
succeeded when the Nigerians were lured into Kerala in March 2010.
They were then arrested by the Karipur police. The strong evidence based
on which the prosecution presented the case became crucial in the first
verdict against financial fraud under the IT Act.

The case of National Association of Software and Service

Companies v. Ajay Sood and others, 127 ruled that phishing on the

126Prashant Mali: Cyber Law & Cyber Crimes, Ist Edn. 2012, Snow White Publications. P-35.
127. The Judgment in the case was delivered by the Delhi High Court on March 12, 2005.

{341}
 internet is an illegal act entitling the victim for an injunction and recovery
of damages just as in case of passing off.

In the instant case, the plaintiff i.e. National Association of

Software and Service Companies having its trade name NASSCOM, was
the Indias premier software association and the defendants were running
an employment agency providing employment and recruitment
opportunities to job-seekers. In order to obtain personal data, which they
could use for the purposes of recruitment, the defendants composed and
sent e-mails to the concerned parties in the name of NASSCOM. On a

ar
complaint from the plaintiff, the High Court of Delhi passed an ex-parte
ad interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the trade
name or any other name deceptively similar to NASSCOM. The Court
el
further restrained the defendants from representing themselves as being
associated as a part of NASSCOM and ordered a search of the
defendants premises by a local Commission.
t
On the basis of two hard disks of computers recovered from the
defendants it was found that the e-mails were sent by the defendants to
Es

fictitious persons in order to hide their illegal fraudulent activities. The

investigation also revealed that the defendants had collected huge amount
of money by fraudulently using the NASSCOMS trade name. Finding
no other way to escape liability and punishment, the defendants admitted
their crime and the parties agreed to a mutual compromise under which
the defendants were to pay 1.6 million rupees to the plaintiffs by way of
damages for violation of plaintiffs trade name rights. The hard disks
seized from the defendants possession were ordered to be handed over to
the plaintiffs who would be the sole owner of those disks.

{342}
 This case is considered as a landmark decision in the history of
Indian cybercrimes for two obvious reasons. Firstly, phishing is
punishable as a cyber offence although there is no specific statutory
legislation to this effect; and secondly, it reaffirms the faith of intellectual
property owners that their intangible property rights are well protected by
the judiciary.

The Court in this case expressed a view that of late, phishing has
developed as a sophisticated method of committing organized cybercrime
by befooling even the most experienced and knowledgeable persons.

ar
Phishing criminals sneak into a computer network or a social networking
site and obtain e-mail addresses of the people and create messages that
purport to come from direct bosses. They manipulate legitimate websites
to redirect e-mails to bogus sites that collect victims information.
el
In Mount Everest Mineral Water ltd. v. Bisleri International
Pvt. Ltd. and others, 128 the petitioner held registration for trademark
t
Himalayan in respect of mineral water since 2002. He filed a suit
against respondent Bisleri International (P) Ltd. seeking to restrain him
Es

from using the trademark Himalayan which was allegedly deceptively

similar to petitioners trademark. The respondent challenged the validity
of registration of two trademarks except the one which considered of the
word HIMALAYAN per se in respect of Mineral Water holding the
said registrations were not justifiable. Therefore, the entries in the
register in respect of those two trademarks should be considered to have
been wrongfully made in the register. Rejecting the contentions of the
respondents, the Court allowed the petition on the ground that a
trademark cannot be declared invalid if it has acquired distinctiveness
after the grant of a registration and before the challenge to the validity of

128 WP (C) 8857/2009 CM 6241/2009 decided on February 22, 2010.

{343}
 such registration. Also, the written statement filed by respondent makes
no reference to Section 26 of the Geographical Indication of Goods
(Registration & Protection) Act, 1999, which protect marks registered
prior to 15th September, 2003, the date when the said legislation was
notified and came into force. The writ petition was therefore, allowed
with cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by respondent (BIPL) to the
petitioner within four weeks from the date of judgment.

i. Judicial Response on Online Gambling:

ar
Gambling in India is prohibited under the Public Gambling Act
1867. However the word gambling is not defined in the Public
Gambling Act 1867. According to the Supreme Court of India, Gaming
is the act or practice of gambling on a game of chance. It is staking on
el
chance where chance is the controlling factor. Internet gambling is
traditional crime of gambling where computer is used as tool provided it
is otherwise is an offence in a particular jurisdiction.129
t
There are thousands of Websites that offer online Gambling. The
Es

special issue with online gambling is that it is legalised in several

countries. So legally the owners of these websites are safe in their home
countries. Virtual casinos, Cases of money laundering etc are online
cases.130

The law related to gambling is also applicable to online gambling.

All gambling contracts are considered to the wagering contracts and it is
not possible to enforce such contracts under the ICA, detailed above.

129 Balwinder Kaur: Internet Gambling, Criminal law Journal, October 2008- Journal Section.
130 Prashant Mali: Cyber Law & Cyber Crimes, Ist Edn. 2012, Snow White Publications. P-82

{344}
 In Minnesota v. Granite Gate Resorts, Inc., 131 the policy
Minnesotas attorney General had stated in its Internet warning was
tested in court. The Attorney General had asserted the right to regulate
the activities of online gambling service based in Les Vegas, Neveda.
The Attorney General argued that the defendant had explicitly
misrepresented its services as lawful on its web page. The court defined
the defendants motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because of hits
from Minnesota at the defendants Website, the availability of a toll-free
number that users could call advertised on its Web page, and the number

list.132

ar
of Minnesota resident who had signed on to the defendants mailing

Relying on inset, the court held that defendants advertising on the

el
Internet constituted a direct marketing campaign directed at residents of
the state of Minnesota, which was sufficiently purposeful to subject the
defendants to suit in the forum state.133
t
In Olivier v. Ministry of Safety and Security, Province of
Gauteng, 134 on application of owner for return of certain computer
Es

equipment seized in a search, a South African court held the

impoundment lawful on the grounds that it was used for online gambling
in contravention of South African law.

In State of New York v. World Interactive Gaming Corp,135

Court granted injunction barring Antigua-based online gaming company
from doing business with New York residents. The court held that
regardless of whether gambling is legal where the company is based. Te

131.65 USLW 2440, 1996 WL 767431 (D. Minn. Dec. 10, 1996)
132 Thomas E. Jensen, Supra note 81, at 4.
133 Kravitz, supra note 15, at 1.
134 High Court of South Africa, Witwatersrand Div., 10/97 (SOUTH AFRICA)
135 1999 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 425 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999) (CANADA)

{345}
 act of entering the bet and transmitting the information from New York
via the internet is adequate to constitute gambling activity within New
York State.

The company required users to enter a physical address was in a

state where gambling was illegal. However, the New York attorney
general used Neveda address from New York and was able to gain
access. The court held this attempt to screen users was not sufficient to
shield the site from liability.

ar
Recent Indian Cyber Lotto Case136 was very interesting on online
gambling. A man called Kola Mohan invented the story of winning the
Euro Lottery. He himself created a website and an email address on the
Internet with the address [email protected]. Whenever accessed, the
el
site would name him as the beneficiary of the 12.5 million pound. After
confirmation a Telugu newspaper published this as a news. He collected
huge sums from the public as well as from some banks for mobilization
t
of the deposition in foreign currency. However, the fraud came to light
when a cheque discounted by him with the Andhra Bank for Rs. 1.73
Es

million bounced. Mohan had pledged with Andhra Bank the copy of a
bond certificate purportedly issued by Midland bank, Sheffields, London
stating that a term deposit of 12.5 million was held in his name.

j. Judicial Response on Cyberstalking:

Stalking in common parlance means a harassing or threatening

behavior which an individual exhibits towards the other. If an individual
uses cyberspace for stalking then it is called cyberstalking. Thus,
cyberstalking is an online course of conduct of a person by which the

136Prashant Mali: Cyber Law & Cyber Crimes, Ist Edn. 2012, Snow White Publications. P-85

{346}
targeted person is terrorized, embarrassed, ashamed, molested, outraged,
or frightened.

Stalking is not a new phenomena. This offence was being

perpetrated in real space also. The stalking by former friends or
employees or by a man to women has been in practice with a desire to
force the targeted party to come to the terms of stalker. The use of
cyberspace for stalking has not only widened the reach of the stalker, as
he can now reach to any part of the globe, but he can now impersonate
the victim to harass or humiliate him. It is now not necessary for stalker
to disclose his identity.

ar
In People v. Alan Munn,137 the defendant in a harassment case,
who asked the readers of a posting on an internet news group to kill a
el
police officer with family, moved to dismissed on the grounds that New
York statute did not cover the internet. Statute covered communications
by telephone, or telegraph, mail or any other form or written
t
communication. The judge held that posting was covered because it was
initiated by means of telephonic communication with the network
Es

community.

In an Australian case R v. Vose138 an older male stalked a young

boy, following him with a camera and placing updates of his activities on
his personal websites, including descriptions of his paedophilia and of his
potential dangerous to those who threatened him. The offender was
charged with stalking.

137 Crim. Court Queens Cty., No. 98Q-052574 (USA). (Amita Verma: Cyber Crimes & Law, 2009, Ist
Edn. Central law Publications, p-349).
138 (1999) VSCA 200.

{347}
 Mrs. Ritu Kholi Case139 is a good example of cyberstalking. The
gravity of cyberstalking came into focus in India when Delhi Police was
asked by one Mrs. Ritu Kholi to file-complaint against an unknown
person who was using Mrs. Kholis name to chat over the Internet for
four consecutive days.

While chatting on the Net, the unknown person was posing as

Mrs. Kholi, was given her address to anyone who would respond and was
using obscene language. He would also encourage others to telephone
Mrs. Kholi by giving her telephone number. Because of this mischief,

ar
Mrs. Kholi received 40 calls in three days mostly at odd hours from
places like Ahmedabad, Bombay, Cochin and Kuwait which shattered
personal life and mental peace of the victim.
el
The Police machinery swung into action. After making thorough
investigation, the IP addresses were traced which led to the arrest of
Manish Kathuria who pleaded guilty. The accused was arrested under
t
Section 509 of the IPC and was afterwards released on bails (the case
was registered before coming into force of the IT Act, 2000)
Es

k. Judicial Recognition to Electronic Documents:

Consequent to passing of the Information Technology Act, 2000,

electronic documents have come to be recognized at par with the written
documents for the purpose of evidence in law. Similarly, the digital
signatures140 affixed in accordance with the provision of Section 5 of the
IT Act, 2000, will be considered equivalent to written signatures. All
electronic documents either in the electronic form itself or as certified
print-out thereof shall be admissible under the Indian Evidence Act,

139 Farooq Ahmad: Cyber Law of India (Law on Internet), 3rd Edn. New era Law Publication, p-411.
140 The expression Digital Signature has been replaced by the term Electronic Signature by the I.T.
(Amendment) Act, 2008.

{348}
1872. The recognition of electronic document as a valid evidence
admissible under the law of evidence has been facilitated the prosecution
of cyber criminals and establishing their guilt on the basis of such
evidence.

Having referred to the legal provisions relating to the judicial

recognition of the electronic record/document as a valid piece of
evidence, it would be pertinent to refer to some of the judicial decisions
where evidence was produced before the court in one or the other
electronic form.

ar
In the case of Crown Life Insurance Co. v. Craig,141 it was held
that data from a computer database is a document within the meaning
of the American Law of Civil Procedures and it must be produced as
el
evidence in accessible form. The court in this case, rejected the argument
that written document referred only to documents in hard copy (on
paper) form.
t
In Armstrong v. Executive Office of the U.S. President,142 the
Es

Court expressed a view that government e-mail record is a record as

defined by the Federal Records Act and therefore, it was not sufficient
for the Government to preserve the paper print-outs of such messages but
its data on computer tape should also be preserved.143

l. Judicial Response on Hacking (Unauthorised Access):

Hacking means unauthorised access to computers. When a person

destroys or deletes or alters any information residing in a computer
resource or diminishes its value or utility or affects it injuriously by any

141. 995 F. 2d 1376 (1993) U.S. (decided on May 28, 1993).

142. 1 F. 3d. 1274 (1993) U.S. (Circuit Courts Appeal 13.8.1993).
143. Timken Co. v. U.S. In this case the Court ordered production of computer database even though its
paper print-outs had been produced previously.

{349}
 means with intent to cause or knowing that he is likely to cause wrongful
loss or damage to the public or any person, he is said to have committed
an offence of hacking.144 The person who commits an offence of hacking
is called hacker. Websters Dictionary defines the term hacker as a
computer enthusiast who enjoys learning everything about a computer
system or network and through clever programming, pushing the system
to its highest possible level of performance.145

Unauthorised access is also a punishable offence under Section 1030 (a)

(5) (A) of the cyber law of United States. The case of USA v. Robert

ar
Tappan Morris146 may be cited as illustration. In this case, the accused
Morris was a research student of the computer Ph.D. program of the
Carnell University in 1988. He had acquired sufficient expertise and
experience in computer technology and programmed a worm which
el
was difficult to read or defect and released it into the computer networks.
He devised four ways in which the worm could break into computers on
the network. As a result of this, several computers at locations around
t
USA either crashed or became catatonic. Morris realising the gravity of
Es

his illegal act, sent anonymous messages from Harvard over the network
instructing programmers how to kill the worm and prevent re-infection,
but the network route was clogged and this message did not reach the
users.

The accused Morris was found guilty for an offence of

unauthorised access to protected systems following a Jury trial and was
sentenced to three years of probation, 400 hours of community service
and a fine of 10,500 dollars. The US Court of Appeal held that although

144 Section 66 of the IT Act, 2000.

145 Websters new World Dictionary of Computer Network Abuse, 6 Harv. J.L. & Tech.307, 310 n. 7
(1993).
146. (1991) 23 928 F. 2d. 504 (US).

{350}
initial insertion of the worm simply amounted to exceeding the
authorised access but evidence showed that later on it was designated to
spread to other computer for which he had no authority, express or
implied.

In Regan Genard Gilmour v. D.D.P., 147 the accused was an

administrative officer in the Debt Management and Relief Section of the
Australian Taxation Department. He was assigned the work of
scrutinising the applications received from tax payers for grant of relief
and forward them for consideration alongwith the relevant data and

ar
document. After the grant of relief by the higher official, he was required
to insert the data into compact computer system which was to be operated
only by the Debt Management Section and thereafter the data was finally
entered on the tax payers general file.
el
The accused had no authority to grant relief and his duties
included to enter various codes into the computer system only in case the
t
relief had been granted. But the accused intentionally entered data relief
code stating grant of relief in 19 cases of tax payers knowing it well that
Es

such relief was not granted. However, the evidence showed that he had
no personal gain or interest in taking this course and he did it solely in
order to expedite the disposal of cases as there were lots of
inconsistencies in determination of relief applications.

He was changed for an offence of unauthorised access to

computer system under Section 76C of the Australian Crimes Act, 1914,
and held guilty of the said offence as he was not authorised by his
employers to insert the relevant data i.e. relief code 43 in the computer
without specific permission of the employers prior to such insertion. The

147. C.W. case No. 60488/95 decided by Supreme Court of New South Wales (Australia).

{351}
 Court held that an entry intentionally made without lawful excuse and
known to be false, has to be treated as to have been made without lawful
authority.

In Delhi Hackers Case,148 Delhi police arrested two hackers on

6th February 2001.149 It was the most breaking news in India because two
people were arrested by the Delhi police for allegation of hacking a
website. This was probably the first case in India where accused were
arrested; as said by police Commissioner Rajan Bhagat. Both the hackers
were detained for allegedly blocking the website named goZnextjob.com.

ar
This website provides support and information to prospective employers
and job-seekers. The accused posted a message on that website declaring
that it was closed but actually it was very much open. The hackers were
el
sent to judicial custody for 14 days as they were charged under section
406 of Indian Penal Code i.e. criminal breach of trust, and section 66 0f
the Information Technology Act 2000 i.e. offence of hacking. Though
they were denied bail by the Metropolitan magistrate on 8 th February
t
2001 after they were arrested on 6th February 2001; on 12th February
Es

Additional Session judge of Delhi, Mr. P.K. Gauba granted bail to those
two hackers who were the partners of software solutions Mr. Amit Pasani
and Mr. Kapil Juneja.

In Hacker Kalpesh Sharmas Case,150 on 26th September 2003, a

media news disclosed about hacker Kalpesh Sharma as he was put behind
the bars in Ahmadabad. 151 He was arrested on 24th September by the
Cyber Crime Branch of Mumbai police on a complaint filed by UTI Bank
officials that the accused hacked the site of UTI, Banks i.e., www.uti.com

148 M. Dasgupta: Cyber Crime in India, 2009, Eastern Law House Kolkata (Calcutta), p-88.
149 National Association of Software and Service Companies 2001, 10th January/ news.
150 M. Dasgupta: Cyber Crime in India, 2009, Eastern Law House Kolkata (Calcutta), p-91.
151 http://utcursch.wordpress.com/2006/12/17/my-answer-to-kalpesh-sharmas-allegations/See also
Cyber Criminal put behind bars, ICE News Search, new media, 26th September 2003.

{352}
on July 11 and send an e-mail to the bank authority with a message that
the website is weak and they should provide security. He expressed
that he can do good for security in exchange of Rs. 15 Lakh and posted
his contact numbers. Police arrested him from Ahmadabad. He was
charged under ss. 66 and 43(b) of the Information Technology Act 2000
and remanded to Police custody till October 6th as Maharashtra
Government Counsel stated that the culprit has hacked many other
websites and was capable to hack many others.

In Syed Asifuddin and Others. V. State of AP and

ar
Anothers, 152 where a 32-bit Electronic Serial Number (ESN) of a
handset provided by Reliance Infocomm under a special package to
customers, had been manipulated by some employees of Tata Indicom in
el
an attempt insert SIMs of Tata Indicom into those otherwise
electronically locked handsets; the Court took it as the offence of
tampering with computer source code under the meaning of section 65 of
the Information Technology Act, 2000.
t
Under the scheme launched by the Reliance Infocomm, a
Es

customer had to use the handset along with the in-fitted Reliance SIM;
and if he were to discontinue the scheme, he would have to pay some
charges plus the price of the handset. Sensing the popularity of the
scheme, it seems, the rival company Tata Indicom tried to enter in to
what may be termed as an unfair competition, whereby some of its
employees started contacting these newly wedded Reliance customers
to bring them to their fold, and reprogrammed their technologically
locked handset so that Tata Indicom SIMs could fit in there.

152 2005 Cr LJ 4314: decided by AP High Court on 29 July, 2005.

{353}
 Acting upon a First information Report filed by Reliance Indicom,
the police raided some offices of Tata Indicom in Andhra Pradesh and
arrested some officials of Tata Tele Services Limited for reprogramming
the Reliance handsets, an offence under IPC as also Information
Technology Act, 2000. The person so arrested approached the High
Court requesting the Court to quash the FIR on the ground that their acts
did not violate the said legal provisions.

The Court observed that under section 2 of the IT Act, 2000, a cell
phone was a computer; and Electronic Serial number (ESN) 153 and

ar
System Identification Code (SID) 154 came within the definition of
computer source code under section 65 155 of the IT Act. It further
observed that to alter the ESN, was tantamount to alter a computer source
el
code, which was an offence under section 65 of the IT Act was
committed; and declined to quash the FIR.

In High Court of Kerala in Feroz v. State of Kerala,156 held that

t
the Government cannot unilaterally declare any computer system as
protected other than the Government work as defined in Section 2 (k)
Es

of the Copyright Act. In this case, the Government of Kerala issued a

notification under Section 70 of the Information Technology Act, 2000,
declaring FRIENDS157 application software as protected system. The
project envisaged development of a software for single window
collection of bills payable to government department, local authorities

153 Electronic Serial Number (ESN) is a unique 32 bit-number programmed into the phone when it is
manufactures by the instrumental manufacturer. ESN is a permanent part of the phone.
154 System identification Code (SID) is a unique 5-digit number that is assigned to each carrier by the
licensor. Every cell phone operator is required to obtain SID from the Government of India. SID is
programmed into a phone when one purchases a service plan and has the phone activated.
155 Section 65 of the IT Act deals with Tampering with computer source document.
156.AIR 2006 Ker 279: 2007 (34) PTC 98 (Ker).
157.FRIENDS was a project comprising seven alphabets denoting Fast, Reliable, Instant, Efficient,
Network, Disbursement, Services.

{354}
and various statutory government agencies etc. towards taxes, fees,
charges for electricity, water etc.

A person could make payments against the government bills in a

computer counter served through FRIENDS system. The work of
developing FRIENDS software was entrusted to Feroz and it was first set
up on Tiruanantpuram free of cost. Encouraged by the success of the
project, the Government entered into a contract with Feroz to set up
similar project in 13 districts of Kerala for a total consideration of
thirteen lakh rupees so that the customer may avail the services of single

ar
window software facility. Feroz complied with the contract and set up
thirteen software centers and was paid the settled remuneration.

However, a dispute between Feroz and the Kerala Government

el
arose when government decided to modify the FRIENDS software to suit
its further requirement and assigned this work to some other agency.
Feroz (appellant) challenged the validity of Kerala Governments
t
notification issued under Section 70 of I.T. Act on the ground that it was
in violation of his copyright under Section 17 (d) of the Copyright Act
Es

and was arbitrary in terms of Articles 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of

India. The High Court concluded that there is no conflict between the
provision of the Copyright Act and Section 70 of the I.T. Act and Section
70 is not unconstitutional as it is subject to the provisions of the
Copyright Act.

Government cannot unilaterally declare any system as protected

other than the government work.158 According to Section 17 (d) of the
Copyright Act, the author of the work shall be the first owner of

158. Government work as defined under Section 2 (k) of the Copyright Act means a work which is
made or published by or under the direction or control of (i) the Government or any of its department,
(ii) any Legislature in India, (iii) any Court, Tribunal or other judicial authority in India.

{355}
 copyright and in the case of Government work, the Government shall, in
absence of any contract to the contrary, be the owner of the copyright
therein. Since there was no contract between Feroz and the Government
of Kerala regarding owners copyright, the Government had the
copyright as the work to be done by the modified system was a
Government-work

m. Judicial Approach for Developing Cyber Forensics:

The term computer forensic was coined for the first time by the

ar
International Association of Computer Specialists (IACS) in Oregon
(USA) in the year 1191. It is a branch of forensic science which is
devised to identify local preserve of extract digital information from the
computer system to produce and store evidence of the cybercrime before
el
the law court. Dr. Clifford Stall, an astronomer and Professor in the
University of Berkely has defined computer forensic as that branch of
forensic science wherein cybercrime investigation and analysis
t
techniques are applied to determine potential legal evidence in a
computer environment. Internet related forensics broadly cover three
Es

areas, namely (i) computer forensics, (ii) cyber forensics, and (iii)
software forensics.

Highlighting the need and importance of cyber forensics in the

investigation of cyber offences, the U.S. Court in Easely McCaleb and
Associates Inc.v. Perry 159 held that deleted files on a defendants
computer hard disk drive are discoverable, and the plaintiffs forensic
expert must be allowed to retrieve recoverable files. In this case, the
defendant at his own initiative had deposited the hard disk drive in
question in the Court. The plaintiff moved for discovery of its contents,

159 Case no. E-2663 (GA.Super. Court) decided on July 13, 1994 wherein the Court allowed the
plaintiffs expert to recover files from the defendants hard drives.

{356}
including files that had been deleted where they could be recovered. The
Court granted permission and issued an order for reviewing electronically
stored data by both the parties.

In Euegne J. Strasser v. Bose Yalamanchi,160 it was held that

where a court deems it necessary to ensure adequate measures for
protection of privileged data, it might order an on-site inspection of
hardware to discover purged records. Similarly, Court has the power to
appoint a neutral computer forensic expert to recover the deleted e-mails.

ar
Computer crime or any other crime for that matter requires lot of
evidence to make a small proof. Because of the intangible nature of large
amount of data held in a computer which has multi-functional role, a
considerable technical search expertise is required which only a
el
competent forensic expert can handle properly. The intecracies involved
in the investigation of computer crime drew attention of the investigating
agencies and the courts in Parliament Attack Case,161 which took place
t
in Delhi on December 13, 2001, wherein the Court held that investigation
of such crimes has to be entrusted to specially trained investigating
Es

officials with the assistance of forensic experts who have thorough

knowledge about the working of computers and its related techniques.

In Firoz v. State of Kerala,162 the Court, inter-alia, observed that

cyber forensics greatly help the investigations of the cybercrime to prove
the motive, means and opportunity for the criminal to commit the crime
and means adopted by him. That is, the purpose which prompted the
perpetrator to commit the crime and means adopted by him, namely,

160 (1996) 669 So. 2d. 1142 (Florida District Appeal Court, decided in April, 1996) the case relates to
litigation between two plastic surgeons relating to data protection.
161 State v. Mohd. Afjal and others, (2003) VIIth A.D.J. Delhi-1
162 AIR 2006 Ker 279

{357}
 why, how and when it was done. The motive may be anything from
curiosity to money-making, revenge or misadventure.163

The Courts in India also recognize the fact that computerized

record keeping is rapidly becoming a normal procedure in the business
and commercial world. Therefore, there is a greater need to develop
adequate forensic mechanism and expertise in this field so that
investigation of cybercrime is facilitated.

n. Judicial Response on Cyber Terrorism:

ar
Cyber terrorism is one of the cyber crimes in superhighway or
cyber world.164 It is a term esoteric, complex and difficult to circumscribe
within the four corners of the definition, which will be universally
acceptable. While the word cyber relates to cybernetics, which is our
el
tool of trade, terrorism denotes an act of violence. The ambiguity in the
definition of the term cyber terrorism brings indistinctness in action as
Dorothy Denning points out, An e-mail may be considered hacktivism
t
by some and some cyber terrorism by others. 165 In the form of cyber
Es

terrorism the terrorist, finds an easy, risk-free, low-cost option.166

In 1997, Barry Collin coined the term cyber terrorism and

defined it as the convergence of cybercrime and terrorism. 167 The term
has since entered popular parlance and is also defined as attacking
sabotage prone targets by computer, which poses disastrous
consequences for our incredibly computer-dependent society.

163 Peter Stephenson: Investigating Computer Related Crime p.85.

164 Manirani Dasgupta: Cyber Terrorism, Criminal Law journal, September 2006- Journal Section.
165 Talat Fatima: Cybercrimes, Ist Edn. 2011 Eastern Book Company, p-196.
166 Ibid.
167 Barry C. Collin, The Future of Cyber Terrorism. Proceedings of 11th Annual International
Symposium on Criminal Justice Issues. The University of Illinois at Chesearch Fellow, Institute for
Security and Intelligence, California.

{358}
 Cyber terrorism falls in the taxonomy of cybercrimes 168 as like
cybercrimes, it is the misuse of computer technology. Cybercrimes are
usually single-handed acts while cyber terrorism is a chain of acts
committed by organized terrorist groups.

Red Fort Attack Case (2000):

On December 22, 2000 at about 9 p.m. in the evening some

intruders started indiscriminate firing and gunned down three army
Jawans belonging to 7th Rajputana Rifles. The Quick Reaction team of

ar
the battalion returned the firing towards the intruders who escaped by
scaling over the rear side boundary wall of the Red Fort. This attack
rocked the whole nation generally and the city of Delhi in particular.
el
The facts of case Mohd. Arif @ Asfaq v. State of NCT of Delhi
prove beyond doubt that there were used several mobile phones and a
computer centre called Knowledge Plus run by the appellant Arif alias
Ashfaq, in the process. It may be mentioned that Arif was a Pakistani
t
national but had fraudulently got a ration card, landline phone, cell
Es

phone, driving licence, and even a flat in Delhi in his name in Delhi in
order to play his role in executing the terrorists plan of attacking the
historic monument Red Fort.

In the light of the provisions of IT Act, as amended in 2008, this

could be termed as a case of cyber terrorism; but in the absence of the
same, the accused person were tried under the relevant provisions of
Indian Penal Code, 1860. Confirming his death sentence, the apex Court
made the following observations:

168 Cyber terrorism is a specie of cybercrime. S.V. Rao, Chap 7 Typology of cyber Crimes: Trend
and Patterns in Law of Cyber Crimes and Information Technology Law (Wadhwa & Co., Nagpur
2004) 87; Parthasarathy Pati, Cybert Crimes: Hardship to curb it.

{359}
 In fact, this is a unique case where there is one most
aggravating circumstances that it was a direct attack on the unity,
integrity and sovereignty of India by foreigners. Thus, it was an attack on
Mother India. This is apart from the fact that as many as three persons
had lost their lives. The conspirators had no placed in India. Appellant
was a foreign national and had entered India without any authorization or
even justification. This is apart from the fact that appellant built up a
conspiracy by practicing deceit and committing various other offences in
furtherance of the conspiracy to wage war against India as also to commit

ar
murders by launching an unprovoked attack on the soldiers of Indian
Army. We, therefore, have no doubts that death sentence was the only
sentence in the peculiar circumstance of this case.
el
We, therefore, confirm the judgment of the trial Court and the
High Court convicting the accused and awarding death sentence for the
offences under Section 302, Indian penal Code, 1860. We also confirm
all the other sentences on all other counts and dismiss these appeals.
t
(Emphasis added.) Laptop recovered from terrorist, who attacked
Es

Parliament. The laptop which was seized from the two terrorists, who
were gunned down when Parliament was under siege on December 13,
2001, was sent to Computer Forensics Division of BPRD after computer
experts at Delhi failed to trace much out of its contents. The laptop
contained several evidences that confirmed of the two terrorists motives,
namely the sticker of the Ministry of Home that they had made on the
laptop and pasted on their ambassador car to gain entry into Parliament
House and the fake ID card that one of the two terrorists was carrying
with a Government of India emblem and seal. The emblems (of the three
lions) were carefully scanned and the seal was also craftly made along

{360}
with residential address of Jammu and Kashmir. But careful detection
proved that it was all forged and made on the laptop.

o. Judicial Response on E-Mail Misuse:

Electronic mail properly called as e-mail has become most popular

and convenient mode of communication. It has, however, serious
limitations. It can be intercepted and modified, changed or altogether
altered by the interloper. The changes thus made cannot be detected. The
sender of the mail can hide his identity. Technologically it is possible to

ar
make an e-mail appear to haves come from third person. This flexibility
in communication has paved the way for e-mail misuse. Nowadays, e-
mails are being used to perpetrate frauds, scams, terrorist activities and
other heinous crimes. A good number of cases have been decided in
el
America pertaining to e-mail abuse

In United States v. Kammersell, 169 the defendant was found to

have sent a threatening e-mail via AOL an interstate service. It was held
t
that federal interstate jurisdiction was proper even though the message
Es

was sent from and received in the same state.

It was further held that federal laws prohibiting transmission in

interstate commerce of communications containing threats applied,
because the e-mail was sent via a commercial online service and routed
outside the state before reaching its final destination within the state.

170
In United States v. Machado, the defendant had sent
threatening e-mail to Asian students at University of California at Irvine
based on race/ethnicity. The defendant contended that the e-mails were
sent idly and without intention to act on threats. The court, however, did

169 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8719 (D. Utah 1998) USA
170 C.D. Cal. 2/10/98 USA

{361}
 not accept his contention and held accused liable for violating federal
hate-crime law.

In State of Washington v. Townsend,171 a Washington Appellate

Court affirmed a conviction for second degree rape of a child. The
defendant appealed the lower courts decision to admit into evidence
copies of e-mail messages between himself and a police officer posing as
a 13 years old girl. The defendant argued that the e-mail messages were
copied in violation of the Washington privacy Act, which prohibits the
copying of private communications transmitted by telephone, telegraph,
radio or other device.

ar
p. Judicial Response on Data Theft:
el
According to Wikipedia Data Theft is a growing problem
primarily perpetrated by office workers with access to technology such as
desktop computers and hand-hold devices capable of storing digital
information such as flash drives, iPods and even digital cameras. The
t
damage caused by data theft can be considerable with todays ability to
Es

transmit very large files via e-mail, web pages, USB devices, DVD
storage and other hand-held devices.

T-Mobile Data Theft Case172 is a landmark case of Data Theft.

The Chester Crown Court has orders two former employees of UK
mobile operator T-Mobile to pay a total of $73,700 after stealing and
selling customer data from the company in 2008, It is a landmark ruling
because, it is a record fine for data protection offences, but more
important than that, is that for the very first time we are seeing the
criminal courts taking data protection seriously, David Turley and Darren

171 No. 19304-7-111 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001) USA

172 June 2011 Chester Crown Court (UK).

{362}
Hames pleaded guilty to offence under Section 55 of the Data Protection
Act, but the fines were imposed under the Proceeds of Crime Act. Mr.
Turley was ordered to pay $45,000 and Mr. Hames was ordered to pay
$28,700. Both face an 18-month prison term if they fail to pay within six
months.

The IT Act, 2000 as amended by IT (Amendment) Act, 2008,

Section 43(b) read with Section 66 is applicable and under Section
379,405 & 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 is also applicable with data
theft.

ar
In Just Dial v. Infomedia 18 Delhi HC,173 Just Dial, with a single
national number 69999999 in 240 cities, has obtained injunction against
Infomedia 18 Limited (one of the group company of media group TV
el
18), restraining it from carrying out any business or rendering any service
of providing information of business, services, and products, through
their newly launched website askme.in.
t
In a suit filed by Just Dial against Infomedia 18, Just Dial alleged
Es

that Infomedia 18, Just Dial alleged that information 18 had copied its
extensive database and was displaying the same on its website askme.in,
thereby infringing Just Dials copyright in its valuable database. The
Delhi High Court has granted an exparte injunction against Infomedia 18,
restraining them from infringing Just Dials copyright and from running
the website askme.in till the next date of hearing. The High Court has
also appointed commissioners to visit Infomedia 18 Ltd,s office in Delhi
and Mumbai and to seize and take into custody all the CPUs, compact,

173 Prashant Mali: Cyber Law & Cyber Crimes, Ist Edn. 2012, Snow White Publications. P-16

{363}
 floppy discs and/or other storage media containing any part of the
commercial or business directory database belonging to Just Dial.

q. Judicial Response on Illegal Online Selling :

It is becoming increasingly common to find cases where sale of

illegal articles such as counterfeit currency, counterfeit branded products,
narcotics drugs, weapons, wildlife etc. is being facilitated by the Internet.
Information about the availability of the products for sale is being posted
on auction websites, bulletin boards etc. It is practically impossible to

ar
control or prevent a criminal from setting up a website to transact in
illegal articles. Additionally, there are several online payment gateways
that can transfer money around the world at the click of a button. The
Internet has also created a marketplace for the sale of unapproved drugs,
el
prescription drugs dispensed without a valid prescription, or products
marketed with fraudulent health claims.

In Sanjay Kumar Kedia v. Narcotics Control Bureau,174 the

t
Supreme Court deciding a special leave petition touched on Section 79 of
Es

the Information Technology Act, 2000. The Petitioner (Sanjay Kumar

kedia) was ostensibly running an online pharmacy which was alleged
used to sell psychotropic substances to customers without prescriptions.
He was subsequently issued a notice Section 67 of the Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Thereafter the petitioner filed an
application for bail several times which was rejected by the courts and
hence preferred the special leave petition to appeal against the orders for
refusal of bail. The counsel for petitioner cited section 79 as a defense
stating that it granted immunity from prosecution. He stated that the
companies of the petitioner only provided third party data and

174 Decided by Supreme Court on December 4, 2007.

{364}
information without any knowledge as to commission of an offence
under the Act. The respondents (Narcotics Control Bureau) rebutted this
by stating that the petitioner and its associates are not an intermediary as
defined under section 79 of the said Act as their acts and deeds was not
simply restricted to provision of third party data or information without
having knowledge as to commission of offence under the NDPS Act. The
company (Xponse Technologies Ltd. And Xpose IT Services Pvt. Ltd
headed by Sanjay Kedia) has designed, developed, hosted the
pharmaceutical websites and was using these websites, huge quantity of

ar
psychotropic substances (Phentermine and Butalbital) have been
distributed in USA with the help of his associates. The Supreme Court
quite correctly applying the law as its stands held that (a) the petitioner
was not an innocent intermediary as defined under Section 79 0f the
el
Technology Act according to the investigating agencies, they were the
owners and were responsible for the contents therein; and (b) Section 79
will grant immunity to an accused who has violated the provisions of the
t
Information Technology Act, 2000 and not grant an immunity under the
Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Es

r. Judicial Response on Email Spoofing:

According to Wikipedia e-mail spoofing is e-mail activity in which

the sender addresses and other parts of the e-mail header are altered to
appear as though the e-mail originated from a different source. e-mail
spoofing is sending an e-mail to another person so that it appears that the
e-mail was sent by someone else.

Under the IT Act, 2000 as amended by ITAA, 2008, Section 66-D

is applicable and Sections 417, 419 and 465 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
are applicable.

{365}
 Pranab Mitra, former executive of Gujarat Ambuja Cement
impersonating himself as a woman, Rita Basu created a fake e-mail ID
through which he contacted Mr. V.R. Ninawe an Abu Dhabi
businessmen. After long term relationship through interaction through
email and other cyber medium, Mitra sent an emotional e-mail that "she
would commit suicide" incase Ninawe ended the relationship. He also
gave him "another friend Ruchira Sengupta's" e-mail ID which was in
fact his second bogus address. When Ninawe mailed at the other ID he
was shocked to learn that Mitra had died and police is searching Ninawe.

ar
Now Mitra faced the liability under the law and he has to spend huge
amount to get out of the legal entangle. Finally however he went to
Mumbai to lodge a complaint regarding the fact that he was in fact
cheated by Pranab and he has no role in his murder.
el
s. Judicial Trend in Other Cases:

In Center for National Security Studies Vs U.S Department of

t
Justice, 175 the Circuit Court applied the mosaic theory to uphold the
Justice Departments categorical denial of FOIA requests for information
Es

about more than seven hundred people detained in the wake of the 9/11
attacks.

In North Jersey Media Group Vs Ashcroft,176 the third Court

applied the theory to uphold governments decision to close 9/11 special
interest deportation hearings to the Public and Press.

In Alkhaz Case 177 , an individual proficient with the use of a

computer used the Internet to post a child's (or adult's) name and
telephone number on sexual explicit Internet sites. This posting invited
175 17 F.Supp.2d 58
176 205 F.Supp. 2d 288, 300
177 200 U.S. 113 (1993).

{366}
visitors to call and inquire about the named individual, who was a child.
As a result, the named individual was subjected to consistent, harassing
and possibly sexual explicit telephone calls every day of the week, at any
and all hours. The repeated inquiries caused the recipient of the calls
and/or messages to become fearful for his/her safety and the safety of
their family. The Boehle family decided that they had to move outside of
Will County in order to protect their daughter, who was the subject of the
postings, telephone calls and messages, from any potential harm they
feared might occur as a result of such harassment.178

ar
The Alkhaz case is one instance in which existing law proved to be
inadequate to deal with computer-facilitated anti-social conduct. Other
examples abound, some of which were ultimately addressed by the
el
amendment of existing law or the adoption of new penal law.

In Basavraj R. Patil v. State of Karnataka,179 the point of law

involved in the case was whether an accused needs to be physically
present in Court to answer the questions put to him by the court whilst
t
recording his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal
Es

Procedure, 1973. If the world personally used in the section is strictly

and literally construed, it would mean that the accused has to be
physically present in the court. This was the view held by minority
Judges in this case but the majority judgment held that the provisions of
Section 313 of Cr. P.C. have to be considered in the light of the
revolutionary changes in technology of communication and transmission
and the marked improvement in facilities for legal aid in the country.

178 Brenner, Sussan W, University of Dayton School of Law, Cybercrime Investigation and
Prosecution: The Role of Penal and Procedural Law, Available at
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN003073.pdfhttp://unpan1.un.
org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN003073.pdf, accessed on 20-8-2009
179. AIR 2000 SC 3214

{367}
 Therefore, it is not necessary that in all cases the accused must
answer by personally remaining present in the court. Particularly, when
evidence is being recorded by video-conferencing, the accused person
may answer the questions put to him by court on the screen, and it will be
as good as his personal physical presence in the court.

In S. Sekar v. The Principal General Manager (Telecom)

(S.S.N.L.), 180 the petitioner is an employee of the second respondent,
B.S.N.L., working as a Telecom Technical Assistant (Switch). It so
happened that while he was working in SIPCOT MBM Main Exchange,

ar
Keeranur, the B.S.N.L. higher officials suspected him and others for
having committed offences in manipulating the computer system and
thereby causing loss to B.S.N.L. The FIR in Crime No. 1 of 2004 was
el
come to be registered on 06.01.2004 by the Police, Pudukottai, for the
offence under Section 406, 420 and 468 I.P.C. and 43(g) of the
Information Technology Act, 2000.
t
The main trust of the grievance of the petitioner in this case is that
when there is a special enactment namely, the Information Technology
Es

Act, 2000 which is an operation relating to the alleged misconduct

attributed as against the petitioner, there is no question of invoking the
penal sections under the Indian Penal Code, It is also his specific
plausible argument that Section 43(g) of the Information Technology
Act, 2000, has been invoked without any basis. The Second respondent
filed the computer which was adopted by the first respondent also,
denying and refuting the allegations and the averments highlights that the
FIR registered was proper and the Police is investigating into the matter
properly.

180 2004, High Court of Madras. (Prashant Mali: Cyber Law & Cyber Crimes, Ist Edn. 2012, Snow
White Publications. P-256).

{368}
 The point for consideration is as to whether FIR referred to supra,
has to be declared null and void as prayed by the Writ petitioner?

It was held that the Police to investigate thoroughly into the

matter and add or delete the penal Sections under the Information
Technology Act, 2000, as well as IPC and ultimately, it is for the
criminal court which would be seized of the matter to decide on that. The
Section 43(g) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, invoked by the
police and specified in the FIR is declared void. Accordingly, the Writ
petition is ordered. No cost, connected M.P. is closed.

ar
In Kalyan Chandra Sarkar Vs Pappu Yadav,181 Pappu Yadav
was arrested for murder and was imprisoned in the Belur jail at the state
of Bihar. Pappu Yadav flagrantly violated all the norms envisaged in the
el
jail manual and he entertained a large number of guests from outside and
went to the extent of humiliating the Inspector General of Police
boastfully on the ground that since he is a political person his whims and
t
caprice would prevail. Hence it led to a hue and cry and it was almost
Es

going to be settled for once and all that he should be transferred out of
Bihar so that the trial could take place without fear and favour from the
political parties. However the defense lawyer contended that once it is
going to be materialized then it is going to vitiate the ends of justice as he
will not be able to attend the court proceedings and instruct the counsel
effectively. The Court placing reliance on the Praful Desai judgment held
that even if he is not transferred out of Bihar and is not physically present
in the Court room the trial can be held with the help of video
conferencing.

181 2004 7 SCC 539

{369}
 In Maharashtra Vs Praful Desai,182 the Supreme Court examined
the question regarding use of modern technology like recording of
evidence by way of video conferencing at length. In the said case,
interpretation of section 273 Cr.P.C., which requires that evidence in a
trial has be taken "in the presence of the accused" or his pleader, came up
for consideration. In that case, the prosecution wanted to record evidence
of a doctor in US through video conferencing, as the doctor refused to
come to India for deposing evidence and there was no way by which
presence of the said doctor could have been procured by our courts. The

ar
Supreme Court held that recording of evidence by use of videoconference
satisfied the requirement of section 273 Cr. P. C.

Anr.183:
Nirav Navinbhai Shah & 4 ors. V. State of Gujarat and
el
Conclusion

A critical evaluation of the case-law referred to above, makes it

t
abundantly clear that operation of global networks and the concept of
Es

quasi-physical territory associated with cyberspace, call upon the need

for a new legal perspective and pragmatic approach in handling cyber
related crimes by the judiciary. With the tremendous growth of e-
commerce, e-banking and e-service regime, the law applicable and
administered to cyberspace crimes should be in tune with legal
requirements for avoiding the vagaries and discrepancies of national
administration of justice system, be it criminal or civil.

There has been significant change in the judicial trend with regard
to adjudication of cybercrime during the past two decades. Realising the
182Appeal (crl.) 476 of 2003 Appeal (crl.) 477 of 2003
183 2004, High Court of Gujarat. ( Prashant Mali: Cyber Law & Cyber Crimes, Ist Edn. 2012, Snow
White Publications. P-260).

{370}
fact that data stored, processed and transmitted in the electronic form is
not directly tangible; the courts while adjudicating on cyber cases no
longer adhere to strictly rigid and literal interpretation of law but adopt a
more pragmatic and practical approach to the problems involved in the
case before them for disposal, without, however, deviating from the basic
intent of the legislature in enacting the law applicable to the case.

In view of the expanding dimensions of cybercrimes in India in

recent years, it is not only the police force but also the judicial officers at
the lower as well as higher level, who need to be properly educated and

ar
trained in various technological aspects of cybercrimes. In the present
scenario, the perpetrators of these crimes are moving much faster than the
law enforcement agencies in exercising effective control over them. The
el
need of the time therefore, is that the judiciary should move faster than
the law enforcement agencies in excersing effective control over them.
The need of the time therefore, is that the judiciary should move faster
than the cyber criminals by expediting disposal of cyber cases within a
t
time-frame and make sure that the guilty do not escape punishment due
Es

to vagaries of law and evidence. As it has been rightly said, the threat at
present is not from the intelligence of the cyber criminals but it is from
the ignorance and lack of will to fight against cyber criminality. It may
be reiterated that computer is a tool as well as a target for the preparation
of cybercrime. The Information technology Act, 2000 specifies the illegal
acts which have been made punishable as offences under the Act. The
amendments made in the Indian Penal Code, law of Evidence and
Criminal Procedure, Bankers Book Act and the Negotiable Instruments
Act also enable the law enforcement agencies and the judiciary to nab
cyber criminals promptly and punish them.

{371}
 The statistical data of cybercrime in India indicates that the
incidents of these crime is constantly on an increase as compared to the
rate of conviction which is significantly low the reason being that there is
general lack of awareness about the computer crimes among the people
who at times even do not know that they have fallen a victim to the
illegal activities of perpetrators of cybercrime. In result, most of the
crime remain unreported, and a few which are reported, result in acquittal
due to ignorance of the police and investigating officials about the
technicalities of these crimes and lack of sufficient evidence against the
accused.184

and
ar
Realising the problem to and handicaps of the police, law
enforcement agencies prosecutors in handling cybercrime
el
investigation due to inadequate knowledge and skill in this hi-tech field,
Justice Yad Ram Meena, the Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court
suggested that a forensic science University be set up in the State which
will help the investigating officials and the judges to unravel vital clues
t
in solving cybercrimes, economic offences and crimes committed by
Es

using sophisticated technology. It would also help in speeding up judicial

proceedings. The conduct of judicial trial by video-conferencing has
already commenced in major cities in India, which will gradually pick up
momentum with the necessary infrastructure and equipment facilities
being made available in court-rooms, police stations, prisons and
lawyers chambers. Recourse to video-conferencing and similar new
technologies will develop the law enforcements capability to stay
abreast new cybercrimes such as encryption etc. and it will go a long way
in improving the quality of justice particularly, in reducing costs and
delays in disposal of cases specially, the computer related offences.

184 Rohas Nagpal: Seven Years of Indian Cyber Law, paper presented in Clubhack in December,
2007.

{372}
 One of the cyber law experts and Supreme Court lawyer Mr.
Pawan Duggal has suggested that there is urgent need for special
tribunals being set up headed by well equipped and properly trained
Judges to deal solely with cybercrime cases. 185 Another cyber law
specialist Shri Prathmesh Popat practicing in Mumbai has underlined the
need for computer friendly lawyers and Judges who are well versed with
the functioning of the computer system and its operational pitfalls to
handle cybercrime cases.

ar
t el
Es

185 Pawan Duggal: Cyber Crime (2003) p.154.

{373}