Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a man accused under the Information Technology Act and the Indian Penal Code, holding that consensual private photographs shared between adults do not constitute a cyber offence in the absence of publication or transmission.
Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta set aside an order of the Birbhum sessions court that had framed charges against the accused and quashed the proceedings pending before the trial court. The case arose from a complaint filed by a woman who alleged that she was induced into a physical relationship on a false promise of marriage and was later threatened with disclosure of private photographs after her marriage to another person.
According to the materials placed before the court, the parties became acquainted through social media, developed a relationship over several years, met frequently at public places and travelled together, during which photographs were taken with mutual consent. The relationship ended before the woman married another person.
Considering the scope of Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, the court held that the provision is attracted only when there is actual capturing, publication or transmission of images of a private nature. It recorded that the complaint did not allege, nor did the investigation reveal, that any private image had been published or transmitted by the accused.
The court further held that apprehension or fear that photographs might be misused in the future does not constitute an offence under the provision.
The court also held that charges framed under Section 66A of the IT Act were legally unsustainable, noting that the provision has been struck down. On the allegations under the IPC (rape and cheating), the court observed that to establish an offence based on a false promise of marriage, it must be shown that the promise was dishonest from the inception of the relationship. The materials on record, including the FIR, reflected a long-standing consensual relationship, and the court found no allegation that the promise of marriage was false at the outset.
The court also noted investigative lapses, including that the complainant’s statements were not recorded during investigation. The court quashed the criminal proceedings.