Dont' Raise the bogey.."Law is Wrong"

.

 

Previous Articles:

Outrage Expressed at bazee.com CEO arrest :

What is Due Diligence?..1..Effect of Section 79 of ITA-2000

What is Due Diligence?..2..(Effect of Section 85 of ITA-2000)

Arrest of Avnish..Industry Responds(Should  Law Take Its Own Course?)


True to expectation, the intense pressure brought by the industry and more so by the US administration had its desired effect. Mr Avnish Bajaj got bail after agreeing to certain conditions that he would not flee the country etc.

It is good news for the businessmen in the country that if they have US connections, even the "Law Will Take the US directed Course".

For the removal of all doubts, let me clarify that I am happy that the discomfiture of Mr Avnish Bajaj was short lived since, as I have already stated in my earlier articles, I have held that he should be doubly protected under both Sections 79 and 85 of the ITA-2000.

There is also a legal question as to how much of ITA-2000 is applicable to bazee.com as to the extension of  IPC. Since bazee.com's involvement in the case is described more precisely to Section 292 of IPC (Extended to Electronic Documents by virtue of Section 4 of ITA-2000), it is possible to interpret that the case on bazee.com rests more on IPC than on ITA-2000. I suppose the legal pundits and the prosecution that have been expressing their opinion on the case in different media have missed this point.

Section 292 of IPC states : "... Whoever...in any manner puts into circulation...book, pamphlet, paper, drawing, painting, representation or figure or any other obscene object whatsoever..shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than six months and not more than two years...(See More details in "Bloggers Beware"  at http://www.naavi.org/blog_issues/index.html)

The call for "Change the IT laws", first mooted by Mr Amit Mitra, Secretary General of  FICCI and acknowledged by Mr Narayana Murthy of Infosys and Mr Kamal Nath, the honourable Minister for Commerce have also missed the point that even if they can change the IT law (Say with retrospective effect) , the case may still continue on the strength of  IPC.

It has also been pointed out by some that the "Due Diligence" requirement is not keeping with the principle of Jurisdiction that "Everyone is Innocent Until Proven Guilty" and the onus of proving innocence is shifted to the accused by virtue of the "Due Diligence" requirement.

I would like to point out that this may not entirely be correct. What Sections 79 and 85 of ITA-2000 imply is that after having proved that a "Crime has in fact been committed in a Network/Company", the "Due Diligence" will protect the Network Service Provider or the Company official from any of his responsibilities. Hence the Company or the Network Service provider will be considered innocent until it is proven guilty. It is only at the next stage that the "Due Diligence" aspect will come to be looked at. This is therefore not in any way affecting the Jurisprudence principles as we know today.

In the case of Bazee.com, there was no doubt that the crime had been committed by Bazee. The point under discussion was whether it can be absolved of its responsibility under Section 79. If not whether Mr Avnish Bajaj could be personally absolved of his responsibility (though some other official would have been responsible).

I request industry captains not to raise the bogey of  "Law is Wrong". Give some time for people to understand the law. Instead I would like Industry captains to think, "What have they done to let the industry players and professionals understand the law as it is". Why they should not instill a discipline amongst it's members to go for a Cyber Law Compliance Audit from time to time to mitigate the Techno Legal Risks. (See www.cylawcom.org for details)

By applying pressure on the Police and Judiciary, and getting a short term relief, it appears that the Industry captains have done a disservice to the Criminal Investigation system in the Country and shown that it can be made to buckle under pressure. It would have been better if they had worked for long term goals of defining the "Need For Arrest" and "Need for Special Provisions for the remanded prisoners" than use the bogey of "Law is Bad " argument.

Naavi

December 22,2004

Also See

Bloggers Beware..Set of 10 articles

Advertising Code?..or Section 67 of ITA 2000?

Related Articles:

Times of India report

India Plans US Type Law..TOI

It is Like Arresting the PM of India for a Crime



For Structured Online Courses in Cyber laws, Visit Cyber Law College.com

 

Back To Naavi.org