Section 188 Cr.PC and jurisdiction of Courts

It was held by the Honourable High Court of Delhi that, if an Indian citizen commits a crime in a foreign territory and was arrested in any part of Indian Territory, then more than one courts in India has got the jurisdiction to try such cases.

Such an observation was made by the Delhi High Court while dealing with a case of the accused who got arrested in Delhi for making fake passport in Sydney and Zimbabwe. Though it was argued by the accused that, since the fake passport was made in Bangalore, the case shall be transferred to Bangalore; Delhi High Court didn’t accept such a plea.

It was contented by the accused that, though he committed offences related to fake passport in Australia and Harare, the cause of action of such crimes arose in Bangalore, as the fake passports are made there.

However, court while rejecting such plea of the accused held that, if an Indian citizen commits a crime in a foreign territory and was arrested in any part of Indian Territory, then Section 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will apply.

Under Section 188 of Cr.PC, any court in India can try the case if the accused is arrested in India for committing any offence in a foreign country.

Section 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.PC) deals with offence committed outside India. By virtue of Section 188, When an offence is committed outside India;

(a) by a citizen of India, whether on the high seas or elsewhere; or

(b) by a person, not being such citizen, on any ship or aircraft registered in India, he may be dealt with in respect of such offence as if it had been com- mitted at any place within India at which he may be found:

Provided that, notwithstanding anything in any of the preceding sections of this Chapter, no such offence shall be inquired into or tried in India except with the previous sanction of the Central Government.

Online Rummy is not gambling, says SC

A bench comprising Justices Madan B. Lokur and S.A. Bobde of Supreme Court while hearing an appeal challenging a Madras high court ruling that playing rummy with stakes amounts to gambling, said that the verdict will not impact online rummy websites.

Judgment came after a bunch of petitions filed by clubs and online rummy companies against the Madras High Court verdict that declared rummy for stakes as a form of gambling and hence illegal. However, the high courts of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh found rummy as a game of skill and said it was not illegal. It was in the wake of this divergent view that the clubs as well as online companies approached the apex court.

Supreme Court while putting rummy websites out of the ambit of its scrutiny and chose to concentrate on legality of table rummy played in clubs. These games would come under the ambit of gambling and thus illegal only if it is held that they involve chance and no skill.

Suspension of life term sentence denied

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court upholding the contentions of the public prosecutor that, the appellant did not deserve to be let out on bail since the charge of murdering a young girl in a gruesome manner had been proved before the trial court beyond all reasonable doubts, dismissed the application of the convict to suspend his life term.

The public prosecutor also contented that, the appellant had inflicted injuries on the girl’s father also when he attempted to prevent the murder. Later, he carried the girl’s severed head and threw it in a nearby bush. The prosecution through cogent evidence adduced by the girl’s father as well as other witnesses had proved the entire incident. Therefore, the appellant has not made out a case for suspension of sentence

Earlier the trial court convicted the appellant for life term in the case of trespassing and murder of deceased victim who refused to marry him and severing her head in the presence of her father, mother and younger sister. Charges were made under Section 302 and Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code.

Section 302: Punishment for murder

Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or [imprisonment for life], and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 307: Attempt to murder

Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to [imprisonment for life], or to such punishment as is hereinbefore mentioned. Attempts by life convicts. [When any person offending under this section is under sentence of [imprisonment for life], he may, if hurt is caused, be punished with death.]

Do not compromise with safety, human life is precious

A social justice bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and U U Lalit while asking railways to give a roadmap for operating crossings said that, the law enacted in 1989 for doing away with unmanned level crossings has not been implemented by the railways in the last 26 years.

Bench came heavily on Indian Railways, asking, “Why don’t you tell us when will you complete the task? There must be some road map for at least 203 accident-prone crossings. We are not sitting here for fun. You must tell us what you are doing in this regard”.

Bench also asked Indian Railways that, “Why do you bring more trains when you cannot protect the lives of people? Human life cannot be treated so cheaply. Safety is very important and you must take it seriously”.

As reported in Times of India, there are more than 11,000 unmanned crossings, out of which 203 have been marked as accident-prone. The unmanned crossings are responsible for the maximum number of train accidents at around 40%.

Whether, porn sites should be banned completely in India?

Central Government informed the Supreme Court that, it is impossible for them to block the access to all the porn sites in India. However, it was informed that, the government will block all those sites which are displaying or featuring the abuse of children.

Even if you ban a website, it is possible that, on the next day a new site will come up with the same contents of the blocked website. Hence, in the era of advanced internet and software technologies, it is highly difficult to block all those websites, which are having pornographic content.

Recently, based on a circular from the central government, the Internet service providers (ISP’s) in India blocked 857 porn sites in India with effect from August 1, 2015. Such a movement was highly criticised in various social media.

As a result, telecom ministry decided to block only those websites, which contains pornographic contents of children. It was also informed by the Central Government that, government would not interfere in the personal liberty of citizen, on whether to watch porn or not. However, it is up to the individual to decide that, whether, they should visit those porn sites and watch porn.

Whether, porn should be banned completely in India? What is your opinion? Looking forward to your thoughts…

BMW hit and run case, bail granted to Vismay Shah

Supreme Court granted bail to the convict, Mr. Vismay Shah of famous BMW Hit and run case. The BMW hit and run case occurred on February 23, 2013, where two youth lost their lives in Vastrapur area. Earlier Mr. Vismay Shah was sentenced to five years imprisonment by an Ahmedabad court, in the Hit and run case.

While considering the application for bail, the Bench of Supreme Court consisting of Chief Justice H L Dattu took note of the fact that Mr. Vismay Shah was young and had already spent more than 13 months in jail. Further, the apex court directed the High Court to expeditiously hear Mr. Vismay Shah appeal against his conviction.

Mr. Vismay Shah in his appeal before the High Court, challenged the trial court’s recent judgment convicting him under Section 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of the Indian Penal Code. The Ahmedabad court had also ordered Vismay to pay Rs 5 lakh in compensation to each of the two affected families, and slapped a fine of Rs 25,000 on him.

What is Section 304, Indian Penal Code (IPC)?

Section 304, Indian Penal Codes speaks about the Punishment for culpable homicide not amounting to murder. By virtue of Section 304, whoever commits culpable homicide not amounting to murder shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or imprisonment of either description for a term, which may extend to ten years. Such person shall also be liable to fine;

  1. if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death, or
  2. of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or
  3. with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, or
  4. with fine, or
  5. with both,

if the act is done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death, but without any intention to cause death, or to cause such bodily injury as is likely to cause death.

DOT ordered to ban porn sites in India

Most of the websites which are delivering pornographic contents are at present in accessible in India, on several Internet Service Providers (ISP’s). With effect from August 1, 2015 most of the internet service providers are displaying either a blank page or “Directory does not exist”.

Some browser displayed even the message “Your requested URL has been blocked as per the directions received from Department of Telecommunications, Government of India” when attempting to access a porn site.

Earlier, in the month of July, 2015 Supreme Court declined to pass an interim order to block porn sites in India. While hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by an advocate, asking to ban porn sites in India, it was observed by the apex court that, “how can you stop me from watching it within the four walls of my room?”

In the said case, court further observed that, blocking a porn website being watched at home would be a violation of Right to personal liberty as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

The petition which is asking for a web filter to censor any obscene content (obscenity is wider than pornography) was on a presumption that the consumption of pornography incites and causes sexual violence to women.

Google secures Indian Patent [for annotations associated with video files]

Internet giant Google secured an Indian Patent for an invention regarding a method and system for transferring annotations associated with video files.

Earlier in the year 2009, Google filed the Patent Application for Annotation Framework for Video, as a national phase application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). Accordingly, the application was examined under the Sections 12 and 13 of the Indian Patent Act, 1970.

Google in its application claimed that, annotations provide a mechanism for supplementing video with useful information and can contain, for example, metadata describing content of the video, subtitles, or additional audio tracks.

These annotations can be of various data types, including text, audio, graphics, or other forms. To make their content meaningful, annotations are typically associated with a particular video, or with a particular portion of a video.

Section 12 of the Indian Patent Act, 1970 speaks about the Examination of Patents. By virtue of Section 12, when a request for examination has been made in respect of an application for a patent in the prescribed manner to an examiner for making a report to him in respect of the following matters, namely;

  1. whether the application and the specification and other documents relating thereto are in accordance with the requirements of this Act and of any rules made thereunder;
  2. whether there is any lawful ground of objection to the grant of the patent under this Act in pursuance of the application;
  3. the result of investigations made under section 13; and
  4. any other matter which may be prescribed.

Section 13 of the Indian Patent Act, 1970 speaks about the Search for anticipation by previous publication and by prior claim. By virtue of Section 13, the examiner to whom an application for a patent is referred under section 12 shall make investigation for the purpose of ascertaining whether the invention so far as claimed in any claim of the complete specification;

  1. has been anticipated by publication before the date of filing of the applicant’s complete specification in any specification filed in pursuance of an application for a patent made in India and dated on or after the 1st day of January, 1912;
  2. is claimed in any claim of any other complete specification published on or after the date of filing of the applicant’s complete specification, being a specification filed in pursuance of an application for a patent made in India and dated before or claiming the priority date earlier than that date.

 

Source: financial express

Net neutrality report upholds key principles

Department of Telecom after meeting over 45 organisations including Facebook, Google, Flipkart, Amazon, Paytm, Viber and Skype and telecom service providers and after obtaining views from the general public has released its report on net neutrality in India. Major recommendations of the report are as follows;

The Committee unhesitatingly recommends “the core principles of Net Neutrality must be adhered to.”

The international best practices along with core principles of Net Neutrality will help in formulating India specific Net Neutrality approach. India should take a rational approach and initiate action in making an objective policy, specific to the needs of our country. The timing for this is apt, taking into consideration the exponential growth of content and applications on the Internet.

Innovation and infrastructure have both to be promoted simultaneously and neither can spread without the other. The endeavor in policy approach should be to identify and eliminate actions that inhibit the innovation abilities inherent in an open Internet or severely inhibit investment in infrastructure.

The primary goals of public policy in the context of Net Neutrality should be directed towards achievement of developmental aims of the country by facilitating “Affordable Broadband”, “Quality Broadband” and “Universal Broadband” for its citizens.

User rights on the Internet need to be ensured so that TSPs/ISPs do not restrict the ability of the user to send, receive, display, use, post any legal content, application or service on the Internet, or restrict any kind of lawful Internet activity or use.

OTT application services have been traditionally available in the market for some time and such services enhance consumer welfare and increase productivity. Therefore, such services should be actively encouraged and any impediments in expansion and growth of OTT application services should be removed.

There should be a separation of “application layer” from “network layer” as application services are delivered over a licensed network.

Specific OTT communication services dealing with messaging should not be interfered with through regulatory instruments.

In case of VoIP OTT communication services, there exists a regulatory arbitrage wherein such services also bypass the existing licensing and regulatory regime creating a non-level playing field between TSPs and OTT providers both competing for the same service provision. Public policy response requires that regulatory arbitrage does not dictate winners and losers in a competitive market for service provision.

The existence of a pricing arbitrage in VoIP OTT communication services requires a graduated and calibrated public policy response. In case of OTT VoIP international calling services, a liberal approach may be adopted. However, in case of domestic calls (local and national), communication services by TSPs and OTT communication services may be treated similarly from a regulatory angle for the present. The nature of regulatory similarity, the calibration of regulatory response and its phasing can be appropriately determined after public consultations and TRAI’s recommendations to this effect.

For OTT application services, there is no case for prescribing regulatory oversight similar to conventional communication services.

Legitimate traffic management practices may be allowed but should be “tested” against the core principles of Net Neutrality. a. General criteria against which these practices can be tested are as follows: a) TSPs/ISPs should make adequate disclosures to the users about their traffic management policies, tools and intervention practices to maintain transparency and allow users to make informed choices. b). Unreasonable traffic management, exploitative or anti-competitive in nature may not be permitted. c). In general, for legitimate network management, application-agnostic control may be used. However, application-specific control withinthe “Internet traffic” class may not be permitted. d). Traffic management practices like DPI should not be used for unlawful access to the type and contents of an application in an IP packet. e). Improper (Paid or otherwise) Prioritization may not be permitted. f). Application-agnostic congestion control being a legitimate requirementcannot be considered to be against Net Neutrality. However application-specific control within the “Internet traffic” class may be against the principles of Net Neutrality. g). Mechanism to minimize frivolous complaints will be desirable.

Traffic management is complex and specialized field and enough capacity building is needed before undertaking such an exercise.

CDN is an arrangement of management of content as a business strategy and does not interfere with others business. Making available one provider’s CDN to others on commercial terms is a normal commercial activity. It should at best be covered under law related to unfair trade practice.

Managed services are a necessary requirement for businesses and enterprises, and suitable exceptions may be made for the treatment of such services in the Net Neutrality context.

This Committee refrains from making any specific recommendation on search-neutrality, however, flags this issue as a concern for public policy.

Tariff plans offered by TSPs/ISPs must conform to the principles of Net Neutrality set forth in guidelines issued by the Government as Licensor. TRAI may examine the tariff filings made by TSPs/ISPs to determine whether the tariff plan conforms to the principles of Net Neutrality.

Content and application providers cannot be permitted to act as gatekeepers and use network operations to extract value in violation of core principles of Net Neutrality, even if it is for an ostensible public purpose.

A clause, requiring licensee to adhere to the core principles of Net Neutrality, as specified by guidelines issued by the licensor from time to time, should be incorporated in the license conditions of TSP/ISPs. The guidelines can describe the principles and conditions of Net Neutrality in detail and provide applicable criteria to test any violation of the principles of Net Neutrality.

New legislation, whenever planned for replacing the existing legal framework, must incorporate principles of Net Neutrality. Till such time as an appropriate legal framework is enacted, interim provisions enforceable through licensing conditions as suggested by the Committee may be the way forward.

National security is paramount, regardless of treatment of Net Neutrality. The measures to ensure compliance of security related requirements from OTT service providers, need to be worked out through inter-ministerial consultations.

Suggested enforcement process is as follows: (i) Core principles of Net Neutrality may be made part of License conditions and the Licensor may issue guidelines from time to time as learning process matures. (ii) Since Net Neutrality related cases would require specialized expertise, a cell in the DoT HQ may be set up to deal with such cases. In case of violations, the existing prescribed procedure may be followed. This would involve two stage process of review and appeal to ensure that decisions are objective, transparent and just. (iii) Tariff shall be regulated by TRAI as at present. Whenever a new tariff is introduced it should be tested against the principles of Net Neutrality. Post implementation, complaint regarding a tariff violating principle of Net Neutrality may be dealt with by DoT. (iv) Net Neutrality issues arising out of traffic management would have reporting and auditing requirements, which may be performed and enforced by DoT. (v) QoS issues fall within the jurisdiction of TRAI. Similarly reporting related to transparency requirements will need to be dealt with by TRAI. TRAI may take steps as deemed fit.

Enforcing Net Neutrality principle is a new idea and may throw up many questions and problems as we go along. For this purpose, an oversight process may be set up by the government to advise on policies and processes, review guidelines, reporting and auditing procedures and enforcement of rules.

Capacity building through training, institution building and active engagement with stakeholders is essential. In order to deal with the complexities of the new digital world, a think-tank with best talent may also be set up.

CSK and Rajasthan Royals banned from IPL for two years

Chennai Super Kings (CSK) and Rajasthan Royals (RR) were suspended for two years from the Indian Premier League (IPL) by the panel appointed by the Supreme Court of India. Earlier Supreme Court appointed a panel to address the issue IPL sport fixing and betting scandal.

Panel headed by Justice RM Lodha, in its verdict, which suspended two former champions Chennai Super Kings (CSK), and Rajasthan Royals (RR) of Indian Premier League (IPL), also suspended, Mr. Gurunath Meiyappan and Mr. Raj Kundra from any type of cricket matches for life after they were found guilty of betting in the T20 tournament.

Mr. Gurunath Meiyappan is the son-in-law of current ICC Chief, N. Srinivasan. Mr. Gurunath Meiyappan was the Team Principal of Chennai Super Kings (CSK), and Mr. Raj Kundra was the co-owner of Rajasthan Royals (RR).

Panel observed that, Meiyappan is involved in the sport fixing and betting scandal, and his conduct affected image of BCCI, the Indian Premier League (IPL) and the game of Cricket (Twenty 20/T20). Panel also observed that, Raj Kundra was placing bets through a known punter and was constantly in touch with bookies. Rajasthan Royals have damaged the faith of BCCI and the sport, Mr. Raj Kundra is found guilty of misconduct.

Earlier, Supreme Court had held that the allegation of betting against Meiyappan and Kundra stood proved and set up the three-member committee of its retired judges to determine the punishment for Meiyappan, who was the Chennai Super Kings (CSK) team Principal and Kundra, the co-owner of Rajasthan Royals (RR).

Rajasthan Royals (RR) won the inaugural event in 2008 under the captaincy of Australian spin legend Shane Warne, and Chennai Super Kings (CSK) are also the most successful team in the Indian Premier League (IPL), having won the tournament in 2010 and 2011, and finished runners-up in 2008, 2012, 2013 and 2015. Indian cricket team skipper Mahendra Singh Dhoni (MS Dhoni) was the Caption for Chennai Super Kings (CSK) for all the IPL season.

Kerala pacer and former Indian fast bowler Sreesanth was a part of Rajasthan Royals, where a case is pending against Sreesanth before the Court at Delhi for alleged sport fixing in the 2013 Indian Premier League (IPL). Said case is posted to July 15, 2015 for framing charges in the 2013 Indian Premier League (IPL).