Karnataka High Court: Intermediates not liable for act of vendors under IT Act

The Drug Inspector has filed the Complaint on the basis of information allegedly received by the Deputy Drugs Controller, Mysore, accused was selling his own products.It is alleged that Snapdeal has exhibited SUHAGRA-100 mg Tablets for sale and provided a platform to Seller and purchaser.

On the basis of the above it is alleged that there is a violation under Section 18(c) of the Act, which is punishable under Section 27(b)(ii) of the Act.Courts said that “The order of cognisance is not in compliance with the requirement of Section 191(1)(a) of the Cr.P.C and further does not indicate the procedure under Section 204 of Cr.P.C having been followed.”

Justice Suraj Govidraj in its order said “The only liability of an intermediary under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act is to take down third-party content upon receipt of either a court order or a notice by an appropriate government authority and not otherwise.”Also it was concluded that a cyber-crime complaint can be registered with any of the cyber cells in India, irrespective of where the crime was originally committed.In the result, both the petitions are allowed. The proceedings in C.C.No.156/2020 pending before the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mysuru are quashed.

Case: Kunal Bahl & State of Karnataka Criminal petition No.4676 of 2020.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s