top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

Police form SIT, arrest four

Achalpur Municipal Council serves ‘bulldozer justice’ Mumbai: Amid growing public outrage in Vidarbha, police in Amravati arrested three associates of the prime accused, 19 year old Ayan Ahmed Tanveer in the scandal involving recording and circulation of obscene videos of young women. The police also formed a 47-member Special Investigation Team even as authorities say preliminary inquiries point to a large cache of material and possible involvement of minors, prompting a rapid escalation of...

Police form SIT, arrest four

Achalpur Municipal Council serves ‘bulldozer justice’ Mumbai: Amid growing public outrage in Vidarbha, police in Amravati arrested three associates of the prime accused, 19 year old Ayan Ahmed Tanveer in the scandal involving recording and circulation of obscene videos of young women. The police also formed a 47-member Special Investigation Team even as authorities say preliminary inquiries point to a large cache of material and possible involvement of minors, prompting a rapid escalation of the probe and local administrative action that included partial demolition of the accused’s house. Police on Wednesday took into custody Uzair Khan Iqbal Khan (20), Mohammad Saad Mohammad Sabir (22) and Tabrez Khan Taslim Khan (24) after Ayan’s arrest on Monday. Court remand for the newly arrested trio runs until 21 April as investigators intensify questioning. Officials have so far identified eight victims, but local claims and media reports suggest the scandal may involve far larger numbers — with some sources alleging up to 180 girls and as many as 350 videos circulating online. A cyber team is working to recover deleted files and trace the full extent of distribution. Unauthorised Structure The Achalpur Municipal Council deployed a bulldozer to raze part of the accused’s house, citing unauthorised construction; officials said the timing was coincidental to the probe, but the action has added to tensions in the area. Police have formed a 47 member Special Investigation Team to coordinate forensic, cyber and field inquiries and have appealed to the public not to share any images or clips, warning that doing so is a criminal offence. Female officers are assisting in victim identification and interviews to ensure sensitivity and confidentiality. Investigation Focus Investigators have seized numerous objectionable videos from the prime accused’s phone and are attempting to match faces and locations to identify victims. The accused have been booked under relevant sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the POCSO Act where minors are involved, and provisions of the Information Technology Act for non consensual recording and distribution. Police stress that no formal FIRs from victims are required to pursue the case and have offered the option of filing Zero FIRs to protect identities and fast track action. The scandal has provoked a political storm in Amravati. Opposition leaders have demanded a high level probe and some local groups have called for shutdowns, prompting heightened security. While there have been claims about the accused’s political links, party officials say he has been expelled; nevertheless, the episode has intensified scrutiny of law and order and online safety for young women. Community leaders and activists are pressing for swift arrests of all accomplices and for systemic measures to prevent similar crimes.

Kunal Kamra moves HC against Sahyog portal 

Mumbai: Stand-up comic Kunal Kamra and Senior Advocate Haresh Jagtiani have challenged the validity of the government’s Sahyog portal – an online mechanism used that issues content takedown directions to digital platforms – in the Bombay High Court.

 

The portal gives content withdrawal directives to platforms like X, YouTube, Meta, etc, and Kamra-Jagtiani have raised serious constitutional questions centering on freedom of speech, due process and the scope of government powers over online content.

 

The petitioners have also questioned the Information Technology (Intermediary) Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rule 3 (1)(d) Amendment Rules, 2023, under which Sahyog was established.

 

Under the amended rule, intermediaries are required to take-down or disable access to information used to commit an ‘unlawful act’ within 36 hours of receiving actual knowledge of such content.

 

The rule further mandates that takedown directions must clearly specify the legal basis for the action, the nature of the alleged unlawful act, the relevant statutory position and the precise online location of the content.

 

The Sahyog portal was developed as a dedicated cyber platform that automated this process and facilitated the quick removal of unlawful online information, data or

communication links.

 

Control on Internet content

The petition by Kamra-Jagtiani, filed through advocate Meenaz Kakalia, claims that the portal enables the government to unilaterally block/takedown online content without complying with mandatory legal safeguards.

 

They include: issuing prior notice to the content originator and giving the affected party an opportunity to be heard. They pointed out that such procedural safeguards have been repeatedly emphasised by the Supreme Court as essential to uphold the constitutional validity of the content-blocking provisions.

 

The duo argued that the absence of these safeguards renders both Rule 3(1)(d) and the Sahyog portal ultra-vires the IT Act, 2000.

 

“Given the conspicuous absence of such safeguards, Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules and the Sahyog Portal are rendered ultra vires the IT Act and contrary to categorical judgments of the Supreme Court and this High Court,” the plea by Kamra-Jagtiani said.

 

Rules arbitrary

Kamra contended that the impugned rule and portal expose all online information to arbitrary takedowns, provide no remedy against such actions, and effectively vest unbridled power in many government officers at the Centre and States, and it strikes at the heart of democracy and peoples’ right to access information.

 

Claiming that these provisions are ex-facie unconstitutional as it allows blocking or takedown of all Internet content on vague and broad grounds such as information being “unlawful” or in violation of any law administered by the Centre or States.

 

These powers amount to ‘an unreasonable restriction on freedom of speech and expression’, exceeding the narrowly defined limits under Article 19(2) of the Constitution, they argued.

 

In their plea, the petitioners contended that orders for blocking/ disabling access to online information can only be issued under the IT Act, Sec. 69A, read with the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009.

 

Previous challenge in Karnataka, appeal pending

Incidentally, last year the micro-blogging site X had challenged the Sahyog portal in the Karnataka High Court, on similar lines. 


In Sep. 2025, Justice M. Nagaprasanna upheld the portal’s validity. Currently, an appeal against the order is pending before the Karnataka HC division bench.

 


Comments

bottom of page