Cyberbullying And Criminal Liability
β What is Cyberbullying?
Cyberbullying is the act of using the internet, digital devices, or social media platforms to harass, threaten, intimidate, or demean another person. It includes:
Sending threatening or abusive messages
Sharing humiliating photos or videos
Impersonation and fake profiles
Online stalking or harassment
Posting defamatory content
Cyberbullying can cause severe psychological, emotional, and sometimes physical harm, especially to children, women, and marginalized individuals.
π Legal Framework: Laws Governing Cyberbullying in India
Though there's no specific statute named βCyberbullying Lawβ, various provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Indian Penal Code (IPC) apply:
Under IT Act, 2000:
Section 66A (Struck down in 2015) β Punishment for offensive messages (now invalid)
Section 66C β Identity theft
Section 66D β Cheating by personation using computer resource
Section 67 β Publishing obscene material
Section 67A & 67B β Sexually explicit material and child pornography
Under IPC:
Section 354D β Cyberstalking
Section 499 & 500 β Defamation
Section 507 β Criminal intimidation via anonymous communication
Section 509 β Insult to modesty of a woman
Section 503 & 506 β Criminal intimidation
Section 228A β Disclosure of identity of rape victims
βοΈ Important Case Laws on Cyberbullying in India (Explained)
Case 1: Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India (2015)
Facts: Section 66A of the IT Act was challenged as unconstitutional. The section penalized sending offensive messages via electronic communication.
Issue: Whether Section 66A violated freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a).
Ruling: The Supreme Court struck down Section 66A for being vague and overly broad, thus violating the right to free speech.
Significance: Although cyberbullying wasn't directly addressed, the case highlighted the need for balanced cyber laws to tackle real abuse while safeguarding free expression.
Case 2: State of West Bengal vs. Swapan Kumar Ghosh (2017)
Facts: A minor girl was harassed online through obscene and threatening messages.
Issue: Whether cyber harassment of minors is punishable under existing laws.
Ruling: Court allowed prosecution under Section 67 of IT Act, along with Sections 506 and 509 IPC, confirming that online abuse is actionable.
Significance: Reinforced that cyber harassment of minors is a serious crime even without a specific cyberbullying law.
Case 3: Kalandi Charan Lenka vs. State of Odisha (2017)
Facts: A girl was harassed via fake Facebook profiles, morphed images, and obscene messages. The perpetrator also stalked her physically.
Issue: Whether the accused could be charged with cyberstalking and defamation.
Ruling: The court upheld charges under Sections 354D, 507 IPC and 66C, 66D IT Act, stating that morphing and impersonation amount to cyberbullying and are punishable.
Significance: One of the earliest Indian cases directly recognizing cyberbullying and cyberstalking.
Case 4: XYZ vs. State of Maharashtra (Name Withheld, 2020)
Facts: A minor girl was bullied and harassed on Instagram by anonymous users who sent rape threats and body-shaming messages.
Issue: Whether the police can trace anonymous users and prosecute them.
Ruling: Court ordered the social media platform to cooperate with investigation. FIR registered under Sections 354A, 354D IPC, and Section 67 of IT Act.
Significance: Set a precedent for platform liability and tracing anonymous abusers. Affirmed that anonymity is no shield for cyberbullying.
Case 5: Aarushi Bansal vs. Union of India (2021)
Facts: The petitioner, a college student, was a victim of online harassment through fake profiles and sexually explicit messages sent to her friends and family.
Issue: Whether legal protection against cyberbullying exists under current law.
Ruling: The High Court recognized the trauma faced by the victim and directed investigation under Sections 66C, 66E of IT Act and Section 509 IPC.
Significance: Showed that existing legal provisions can be applied to protect women from cyberbullying.
Case 6: Rini Johar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2016)
Facts: A woman was arrested for a social media post criticizing a public figure. The arrest was made under the now-invalid Section 66A of IT Act.
Issue: Legality of arrest under a repealed provision.
Ruling: Supreme Court held the arrest illegal and said citizens cannot be punished under unconstitutional laws.
Significance: Warned law enforcement against misusing old cyber provisions and emphasized need for legal literacy among police.
Case 7: T.K. Viswanathan Committee Report (2017) (Though not a case, this is important)
Background: After the Shreya Singhal case, there was a vacuum in law addressing online abuse.
Recommendation: The committee proposed new laws specifically targeting cyberbullying, cyberstalking, and online abuse, especially against women and children.
Impact: Led to public discussions and later changes in enforcement and policy.
π§ Summary Table
| Case | Facts | Charges Applied | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shreya Singhal (2015) | Challenge to Section 66A | Freedom of Speech | Struck down vague cyber laws |
| Swapan Ghosh (2017) | Minor girl harassed online | Sec 67 IT Act, Sec 509 IPC | Cyber harassment of minors punished |
| Kalandi Lenka (2017) | Fake FB profile, morphed images | Sec 354D, 507 IPC, 66C, 66D IT Act | Recognized cyberstalking |
| XYZ vs. Maharashtra (2020) | Instagram rape threats | Sec 354D, 67 IT Act | Platform cooperation ordered |
| Aarushi Bansal (2021) | Obscene content, impersonation | Sec 66C, 66E IT Act, 509 IPC | Court recognized cyberbullying trauma |
| Rini Johar (2016) | Arrest under struck law | Sec 66A misuse | Reaffirmed legal protections |
| TK Viswanathan Report (2017) | Policy proposal | β | Suggested new cyber abuse laws |
β Key Legal Takeaways
πΉ Criminal Liability Exists Even Without a "Cyberbullying Law"
While thereβs no standalone statute, combination of IT Act and IPC sections cover most cyberbullying scenarios.
πΉ Anonymity β Immunity
Courts and police can trace anonymous offenders with help from platforms.
πΉ Children and Women Are Particularly Protected
Laws like POCSO Act, Section 354D, and 67B of IT Act offer additional safeguards.
πΉ Platform Responsibility
Courts can compel platforms like Facebook, Instagram, etc., to disclose data of abusers.
π‘ Conclusion
Cyberbullying is a serious and growing concern, especially in an age dominated by social media. Indian courts have repeatedly recognized the harm caused by such acts and held offenders criminally liable under existing laws. The legal system, though not perfect, provides remedies for victims and punishes cyberbullies through a mix of IT Act and IPC provisions.
RELATED Blog
0 comments