top of page
  • prathikshasreddy20

Case Analysis: State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti(2004) C.no.4680 of 2004



·  Background of the case:

The case was filed by a woman based on being online harassed and getting vulgar messages on various social media platforms to harass and offend her those obscene messages were sent by a man who was interested in marrying her but the woman rejected him, which resulted in receiving these kinds of messages by that person. 


· Facts of the case:

Petitioner: State of Tamil Nadu

Respondent: Suhas Katti

Bench: Justice Markandey Katju, Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra, Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore.

Date of Judgment: 5th November 2020


The case involves the posting of insulting and defamatory statements online concerning a lady who was divorced. The accused claim to be a friend of the victim’s family.


The accused was quite disappointed since, he wanted to marry victim. Ms. Roselind, but she ended up being married to someone else. He made another attempt to marry her after the divorce, but she refused. He turned to harassing the women out of frustration and an inability to accept the rejection by posting her phone number and offensive remarks on her in different forums. Consequently, the victim started to receive many annoying and degrading calls from people who thought the women was soliciting for sex work.


The accused created a fake account in the name Roselind with the objective to damage the victim’s reputation in order to transmit such offensive statements on yahoo groups.

The victim filed a complaint in February 2004 under section sections 67 of the information technology act, 2000,469, and 509 of the IPC, 1860, based on the above mentioned facts. After receiving the complaint the police detained the accused who was a Mumbai based resident.


Charges that were filed against him were:

1.   Section 469 of the Indian Penal Code which states (Forgery for purpose of harming reputation).

2.   Section 509 of the IPC, 1860 which states (word, gesture, act intended to insult modesty of a woman).

v Section 67 of information technology act, 2000 which states (publication or submission on electronic mode that is against the will and is to cause defamation).

 

·  Issue:

Was the accused liable for the charges under section 469 and 509 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, and section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000?


· Judgement:

The Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate of Egmore, Tamil Nadu passed the order holding the accused liable; for the charges levied on him. The punishment was a fine amount of Rs.500 and a sentence of 2 years of rigorous imprisonment; under section 469 IPC then, an amount of Rs.500 and a sentence of 1 year of simple imprisonment; under section 509 IPC and then an amount of Rs.4000 and a sentence of 2 years of rigorous imprisonment under section 67 of IT Act 2000.

·   In this case supreme court gave the following reasoning for its judgement :-

· The accused posted obscene and defamatory messages about the said victim on Yahoo messenger groups harming her reputation, sentenced under Section 67 of the IT Act.

· The accused also created fake account and forwarded emails to victim. Which amount to forgery sentenced under section 469 of IPC.

·  The accused made obscene and defamatory messages about the said victim, portraying her sex worker, sentenced under section 509 of IPC deals.

 

·Conclusion

Every aspect of a person’s existence in the21st century is associated with the cyberspace, which gives rise to both the benefits or advantages the internet offers as well as the disadvantages associated with it. controlling the online crimes as now been of top priority. The rules and regulations established to control the cybercrimes is not as effective in nature as there are only few crimes recorded regarding the cyber security.

However, the IT act and its application in the case had a historical influence and aided the public as well as states by setting a trademark for the courts and inspiring individuals to file claims against offences like defamation and harassment through internet.

 

Comments


bottom of page