Slurs against castes and tribes on social media punishable, Indian court rules
The ruling can also be extended to other social media outlets such as WhatsApp
PHOTO: REUTERS
Offensive posts on social media platforms targeting an individual or group of scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (SC & ST) community, even on private and closed groups, are punishable by law, Indian court ruled on Monday, Times of India reported.
In the ruling, the gaps between online abusers and their prosecution are attempting to be bridged. The Delhi High Court made it clear that SC & ST [Prevention of Atrocities] Act, 1989, will apply to casteist sluts made against anyone from these communities.
Though the judgment has been made in reference to the Facebook 'Wall' [Timeline], the ruling can also be extended to other social media outlets such as WhatsApp which has closed privacy settings.
Social media 'more addictive than cigarettes and alcohol'
"When a member registered with Facebook changes the privacy settings to 'public' from 'private', it makes his/her writings on the 'wall' accessible not only to the other members who are befriended by the author of the writings on the 'wall', but also by any other member registered with Facebook. However, even if privacy settings are retained by a Facebook member as "private", making of an offending post by the member - which falls foul of Section under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act—may still be punishable," Justice Vipin Sanghi noted.
The high court clarified that only exception from prosecution in these cases would be if the complainant and those connected to him/her on Facebook are related to each other. Justice Sanghi pointed out that "public view" means "a place where public persons are present - howsoever small in number they may be."
The court also brought out the finer legal nuance and added "it would make no difference whether the privacy settings are set by the author of the offending post to "private" or "public" as sections of SC/ST Act do not require that the intentional insult or intimidation with intention to humiliate a member of the SC or ST should take place in the presence of the said member. Even if the victim is not present, and behind his/her back the offending insult or intimidation with intention to humiliate him/her - who is a member of the SC or a ST takes place, the same would be culpable if it takes place within public view".
Blasphemy: IHC directs authorities to block all social media if necessary
The court's interpretation came while hearing a complaint by an SC woman against her co-sister, a Rajput. The complainant said her co-sister was "harassing and abusing my caste on social network sites/ Facebook" and that she used bad words for Dhobis".
In the ruling, the gaps between online abusers and their prosecution are attempting to be bridged. The Delhi High Court made it clear that SC & ST [Prevention of Atrocities] Act, 1989, will apply to casteist sluts made against anyone from these communities.
Though the judgment has been made in reference to the Facebook 'Wall' [Timeline], the ruling can also be extended to other social media outlets such as WhatsApp which has closed privacy settings.
Social media 'more addictive than cigarettes and alcohol'
"When a member registered with Facebook changes the privacy settings to 'public' from 'private', it makes his/her writings on the 'wall' accessible not only to the other members who are befriended by the author of the writings on the 'wall', but also by any other member registered with Facebook. However, even if privacy settings are retained by a Facebook member as "private", making of an offending post by the member - which falls foul of Section under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act—may still be punishable," Justice Vipin Sanghi noted.
The high court clarified that only exception from prosecution in these cases would be if the complainant and those connected to him/her on Facebook are related to each other. Justice Sanghi pointed out that "public view" means "a place where public persons are present - howsoever small in number they may be."
The court also brought out the finer legal nuance and added "it would make no difference whether the privacy settings are set by the author of the offending post to "private" or "public" as sections of SC/ST Act do not require that the intentional insult or intimidation with intention to humiliate a member of the SC or ST should take place in the presence of the said member. Even if the victim is not present, and behind his/her back the offending insult or intimidation with intention to humiliate him/her - who is a member of the SC or a ST takes place, the same would be culpable if it takes place within public view".
Blasphemy: IHC directs authorities to block all social media if necessary
The court's interpretation came while hearing a complaint by an SC woman against her co-sister, a Rajput. The complainant said her co-sister was "harassing and abusing my caste on social network sites/ Facebook" and that she used bad words for Dhobis".