KHC 1638630

VERDICTUM.
IN
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:26513
CRL.P No. 13141 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13141 OF 2023
BETWEEN:
INAYATHULLA N
S/O NAWAB JAN,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT 5TH CROSS, V V EXTENSION
HOSAKOTE, BENGALURU DIST. - 562114
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. S JAGAN BABU, ADV. AND
SRI. PARAMESH KUMAR H.K., ADV.)
AND:
1. STATE BY POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR

BENGALURU CEN CRIME POLICE STATION,
BANGALORE DISTRICT,
KARNATAKA - 560 052
REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001
2. YOGESH D L
NO.05, MILLERS ROAD,
BENGALURU CEN CRIME POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU - 560 052
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. THEJESH P., HCGP A/W
SRI. HARISH GANAPATHI, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO

QUASH THE FIR IN CR.NO.200/2023 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S
67B OF I.T. ACT, BENGLAURU CEN CRIME POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU DISTRICT NOW PENDING ON THE FILE OF C.J.M.,
BENGLAURU RURAL DISTRICT, BENGALURU.
VERDICTUM.IN
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:26513
CRL.P No. 13141 of 2023
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the
proceedings in Crime No.200/2023 registered for offence
punishable under Section 67B of the Information Technology
Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short).
2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.S.Jagan Babu,
appearing for the petitioner and the learned HCGP
Sri.Harish Ganapathi, appearing for respondent No.1.
3. The facts in brief, germane, are as follows:
A compliant comes to be registered against the petitioner
on an incident that happens on 23.03.2022. The incident is
that the petitioner, between 3:50 p.m. to 4:40 p.m., has
viewed a website, which holds in it pornographic material of
children. This is noticed by the cyber Tipline, which placed an
alert on its Tipline with regard to the IP address. IP address led
to the mobile number of the petitioner and then to his address.
A complaint then comes to be registered on 03.05.2023 after
about two months on the aforesaid incident. The complaint

VERDICTUM.IN
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:26513
CRL.P No. 13141 of 2023
then becomes a crime in Crime No.200/2023 for offence
punishable under Section 67B of the Information Technology
Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the IT Act' for short).
Registering the crime, immediately drives the petitioner to this
Court, in the subject petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would
vehemently contend that Section 67B of the IT Act is not even
attracted in the case at hand. All that the petitioner was doing
was, viewing a pornographic website on his mobile for about
50 minutes. The allegation is that he has viewed child
pornography. He would contend that the petitioner is some
what a porn addict and never intends to circulate anything, as
he was himself only viewing the existing website.
5. Per contra, the learned HCGP would submit that the
petitioner has admittedly indulged in watching child
pornography. Therefore, such things should not be permitted
to be continued. He would contend that it is a matter of
investigation, as what the petitioner has done in the later days.
He would seek dismissal of the petition.

VERDICTUM.IN
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:26513
CRL.P No. 13141 of 2023
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the
contentions of respective learned counsel and have perused the
material on record.
7. The afore-narrated facts, lie in a narrow compass.
What leads to registration of crime, is an alert in the cyber
Tipline that the petitioner watching a particular website on his
mobile between 3:50 p.m. to 4:40 p.m. This results in
registration of the complaint. The complaint reads as follows:
"“ ೕಲ ಂಡ ಷಯ ೆ ಸಂಬಂ ದಂ ೆ ತಮ ೇ ೊಳ ವ ೇ!ೆಂದ"ೆ #ಾನ& ಸ'ೕ(ಚ*

!ಾ&+ಾಲಯzÀ , ೇ(ಶನದ ಅನ/ಯ ೇಂದ0 ಸ ಾ(ರವ 2018 ರ ಮ23ೆಯರ ಮತು5
ಮಕ ಳ/ಇತ"ೆ/ªÀÄಕ ಳ ರುದ8 9ೈಂ;ಕ ಅಪ"ಾಧಗಳನು? ತ@ೆಗಟುBವ ,CBನ ಪ0 ೆ&ೕಕDಾದ
(CCPWC) & (NCCRP) & (NCMEC) Eೕಟ(Fಗಳನು? ೆ"ೆGದುH, ಕ!ಾ(ಟಕ "ಾಜ& ೆ
ಸಂಬಂ ದಂ ೆ ಮಕ ಳ ರುದ8 9ೈಂ;ಕ ಅಪ"ಾಧಗಳನು? ಕುJತು ೇಂದ0 ಸ ಾ(ರದ (MHA)
ದವರು ಸಂಗ02 ದ #ಾ2Kಯನು? ೇಂದ0 ಸ ಾ(ರದ ಎM. .ಆO.P. ಮೂಲಕ EೕQ(F
ನ / Rಯ SೈಬO ಅಪ"ಾಧಗ Tೆ ಸಂಬಂ ದಂ ೆ ದೂರುಗಳನು? ಪJUೕ ಕ0ಮ
ೈTೊಳ ಲು ಐR ಘಟಕ ೆ ಕಳ 2 ದH ಸದJ ದೂರುಗಳನು? ಸದJಯವರು Rಯ
ಪ@ೆದು ೊಂಡು ಅವ ಗಳನು? ಾಂK0ಕDಾ; ಪJUೕ ಅದರ ರುವ Tೌಪ& #ಾ2K Zೇಷ[ೆ
#ಾR ಸಂಬಂಧಪಟB SೇDಾ ಾರJಂದ (Service Provider) #ಾ2Kಯನು? ೊ0ೕ\ೕಕJ ,
C] 9ೈM ನಂಬO-120928689 ರ Rಯ ರುವ #ಾ2Kಯನು? ಪJUೕ ಸ9ಾ;ದುH,
ಆ"ೋ^ G!ಾಂಕ: 23/03/2022 ರಂದು ಮ ಾ&ಹ? 03.50 ಗಂ`ೆaಂದ ಸಂbೆ 4.40
ಗಂ`ೆಯವ"ೆTೆ ಮಕ ಳ ಅUೕಲ ೆ cಾವdತ0/ Reೕ ೕf[ೆ #ಾRರುವ ಬTೆg ಇದ"ೊಂGTೆ
ಲಗK5 ೊಂRರುವ ಆ"ೋ^ಯ ಐ.^. 3ಾಸGಂದ hಾಗೂ ಇತ"ೆ #ಾ2Kಯನು?
ಒಳTೊಂRರುವ ದು ಕಂಡು ಬಂGದುH, Rಯ ರುವ #ಾ2Kಯನು? Extension, Hosakote.
jkೈF ಸಂlೆ& 7019087692 ಆ;ದುH, ಈ ಬTೆg ದೂರು ಾಖ ಆ"ೋ^ಯ ರುದ8
ಾನೂನು JೕKಯ ಸೂಕ5 ಕ0ಮ dgÀÄV¸À®Ä ಈ ಮೂಲಕ ,DೇG ೊಂRರು ೆ5.”
VERDICTUM.IN
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:26513
CRL.P No. 13141 of 2023
This complaint, leads to registration of a crime in Crime
No.200/2023 for offence punishable under Section 67B of the
IT Act. Whether watching pornography material would attract
Section 67B of the IT Act, is what is required to be noticed.
Section 67B of the IT Act, reads as follows:
""67 B Punishment for publishing or transmitting of

material depicting children in sexually explicit act, etc.
in electronic form.
Whoever,-
(a) publishes or transmits or causes to be
published or transmitted material in any
electronic form which depicts children
engaged in sexually explicit act or conduct
or
(b) creates text or digital images, collects,

seeks, browses, downloads, advertises,
promotes, exchanges or distributes
material in any electronic form depicting
children in obscene or indecent or sexually
explicit manner or
(c) cultivates, entices or induces children to

online relationship with one or more
children for and on sexually explicit act or
in a manner that may offend a reasonable
adult on the computer resource or
(d) facilitates abusing children online or
(e) records in any electronic form own abuse or

that of others pertaining to sexually explicit
act with children,
shall be punished on first conviction with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may
VERDICTUM.IN
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:26513
CRL.P No. 13141 of 2023
extend to five years and with a fine which may extend

to ten lakh rupees and in the event of second or
subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to seven years
and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees"
Provided that the provisions of section 67, section
67A and this section does not extend to any book,
pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting,
representation or figure in electronic form-
(i) The publication of which is proved to be justified
as being for the public good on the ground that
such book, pamphlet, paper writing, drawing,
painting, representation or figure is in the interest
of science, literature, art or learning or other
objects of general concern; or
(ii) which is kept or used for bonafide heritage or

religious purposes
Explanation: For the purposes of this section, "children"

means a person who has not completed the age of 18 years.”
Section 67B of the IT Act punishes those persons who
would publish, transmit the material depicting children in
sexually explicit acts in electronic form. The soul of the
provision is publishing or transmitting of material depicting
children in sexually explicit act.
8. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has
watched a pornographic website. This, in the considered view
of the Court, would not become publishing or transmitting of

VERDICTUM.IN
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:26513
CRL.P No. 13141 of 2023
material, as is necessary under Section 67B of the IT Act. At
best, as contended, the petitioner could be a porn addict, who
has watched pornographic material. Nothing beyond this, is
alleged against the petitioner. If the facts are pitted against the
ingredients necessary to drive home Section 67B of the IT Act,
what would unmistakably emerge is, further proceedings
cannot be permitted to be continued, as it would become an
abuse of process of law. It would be apposite to refer the
judgment of the Apex Court in the case of STATE OF HARYANA
v. BHAJANLAL1, wherein it has held as follows:
“102. In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various

relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter XIV and of the
principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions
relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article
226 or the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code which
we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the following
categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power
could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any
court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice, though it may not
be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and
sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae
and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein
such power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or

the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and
accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any
offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other
materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose a
cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers
1
1992 Supp(1) SCC 335
VERDICTUM.IN
-8-
NC: 2024:KHC:26513
CRL.P No. 13141 of 2023
under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a

Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or

complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do
not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case
against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable

offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no
investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a
Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so

absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no
prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there
is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the

provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a
criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and
continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific
provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious
redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala

fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an
ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with
a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”
The Apex Court in the afore laid postulates holds that
even if the facts that forms the complaint is accepted as true, it
would not make out any offence. In such cases, even
investigation should not be permitted to be continued.
Therefore, the impugned proceedings cannot be permitted to
be continued, as it does not make out an offence under Section
67B of the IT Act.

VERDICTUM.IN
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC:26513
CRL.P No. 13141 of 2023
9. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
ORDER
i) The criminal petition is allowed; and
ii) The proceedings in Crime No.200/2023 on

the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bengaluru
Rural District, Bengaluru, stand quashed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KG
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11

KHC 1638630

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

KHC 1638630

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

KHC 1638630

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VERDICTUM.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 13141 OF 2023

1. STATE BY POLICE SUB-INSPECTOR

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the

proceedings in Crime No.200/2023 registered for offence

punishable under Section 67B of the Information Technology

Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short).

2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.S.Jagan Babu,

appearing for the petitioner and the learned HCGP

Sri.Harish Ganapathi, appearing for respondent No.1.

3. The facts in brief, germane, are as follows:

A compliant comes to be registered against the petitioner

on an incident that happens on 23.03.2022. The incident is

that the petitioner, between 3:50 p.m. to 4:40 p.m., has

viewed a website, which holds in it pornographic material of

children. This is noticed by the cyber Tipline, which placed an

alert on its Tipline with regard to the IP address. IP address led

to the mobile number of the petitioner and then to his address.

A complaint then comes to be registered on 03.05.2023 after

about two months on the aforesaid incident. The complaint

then becomes a crime in Crime No.200/2023 for offence

punishable under Section 67B of the Information Technology

Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the IT Act' for short).

Registering the crime, immediately drives the petitioner to this

Court, in the subject petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would

vehemently contend that Section 67B of the IT Act is not even

was, viewing a pornographic website on his mobile for about

50 minutes. The allegation is that he has viewed child

pornography. He would contend that the petitioner is some

what a porn addict and never intends to circulate anything, as

he was himself only viewing the existing website.

5. Per contra, the learned HCGP would submit that the

petitioner has admittedly indulged in watching child

pornography. Therefore, such things should not be permitted

to be continued. He would contend that it is a matter of

investigation, as what the petitioner has done in the later days.

He would seek dismissal of the petition.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the

contentions of respective learned counsel and have perused the

7. The afore-narrated facts, lie in a narrow compass.

What leads to registration of crime, is an alert in the cyber

Tipline that the petitioner watching a particular website on his

mobile between 3:50 p.m. to 4:40 p.m. This results in

registration of the complaint. The complaint reads as follows:

"“ ೕಲ ಂಡ ಷಯ ೆ ಸಂಬಂ ದಂ ೆ ತಮ ೇ ೊಳ ವ ೇ!ೆಂದ"ೆ #ಾನ& ಸ'ೕ(ಚ*

This complaint, leads to registration of a crime in Crime

No.200/2023 for offence punishable under Section 67B of the

IT Act. Whether watching pornography material would attract

Section 67B of the IT Act, is what is required to be noticed.

Section 67B of the IT Act, reads as follows:

""67 B Punishment for publishing or transmitting of

(b) creates text or digital images, collects,

(c) cultivates, entices or induces children to

(d) facilitates abusing children online or