kolkata

Kolkata: Verbal abuse in person is not the only form of conduct that can attract legal consequences. Derogatory and caste-based remarks made through digital platforms can also come under the purview of criminal law, the Calcutta High Court has observed while dealing with a case involving alleged caste-based insults on Facebook.

The court made the observation while hearing a petition filed by a man who had alleged that two individuals had posted objectionable and caste-related comments about him on Facebook. The police, during their investigation, had submitted a ‘nil’ or ‘no clue’ report, stating that they could not establish the allegations. However, the High Court made it clear that the inability to obtain certain information from Facebook could not, by itself, be treated as sufficient reason to bring the investigation to an end.

The case relates to an order passed by a special court in Alipore on June 27, 2023. The special court had accepted the police’s final report and rejected the complainant’s application. Challenging that order, the complainant approached the Calcutta High Court.

The allegations were directed against Rabiu Islam Bulbul and Sayan Dutta. According to the complainant, the two accused had allegedly made derogatory and caste-based comments about his caste identity, religion and family on Facebook. The complainant had also submitted screenshots of the alleged Facebook posts along with his complaint.

Based on the complaint, a case was registered at Behala Police Station under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. During the investigation, police recorded the complainant’s statement and prepared a record of the screenshots and digital links connected with the alleged posts.

The investigating agency subsequently submitted a ‘nil’ or ‘no clue’ report on January 20, 2023. According to the Kolkata Police, efforts had been made through the cyber cell to obtain detailed information about the users from Facebook. However, the required information could not be obtained from the social media platform.

The special court subsequently rejected the complainant’s application, taking into consideration the police report. The court also noted that while charge sheets had been filed in three other special cases initiated by the same complainant, a ‘nil’ charge sheet had been submitted in the present case.

The Calcutta High Court, however, did not accept that reasoning. The court observed that every criminal case has to be examined independently on the basis of the facts, circumstances and evidence available in that particular case. The fact that other cases involving the same complainant had resulted in charge sheets could not by itself determine the outcome of the present investigation.

The High Court also took note of the electronic evidence produced by the complainant. The court observed that where screenshots, digital links and the complainant’s statement were already available, the investigation could not simply be closed merely because the police had failed to obtain information directly from Facebook.

Justice Uday Kumar observed that the investigation should not have stopped after information could not be obtained from Meta or Facebook. According to the court, investigators should have explored other available avenues, including IP logs and other digital evidence that could potentially help establish the source and authenticity of the alleged posts.

The court further observed that the allegations under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the SC/ST Act could extend to caste-based insults made through digital platforms. In other words, the fact that the alleged remarks were made through social media rather than face-to-face does not automatically place them outside the scope of the law.

The High Court also found shortcomings in the investigation, particularly in the manner in which the available digital material was examined. According to the court, the presence of screenshots and digital links warranted a more comprehensive investigation, including examination by personnel with appropriate cyber-forensic expertise.

Justice Uday Kumar therefore set aside the special court’s June 27, 2023 order. The High Court directed that cyber-forensic personnel be engaged to identify the digital footprints and profile logs connected with the alleged offensive posts.

The court also directed that a further report be submitted under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure within three months from the communication of the High Court’s order.

The ruling underlines the importance of treating allegations involving online caste-based abuse as a matter requiring proper investigation when supporting digital material is placed before the authorities. The court’s direction also makes clear that difficulties in obtaining information from a social media platform cannot, by themselves, bring an investigation to an end when other possible digital evidence and investigative avenues remain available.