Online Copyright Registration in India

Protect your creative work
Books, Songs, film, websites, Software, painting, fashion Design etc
Call now: 09891244487

Ask Our legal Experts, on issues related to Divorce

File Mutual Consent divorce right away

Call at ph no: 9650499965
  Search On:Laws in IndiaLawyers Search

To Appeal before CIC - Central Information Commission
For Filing and Hearing contact: Choudhury's law Office
Ph no: 9873628941

Author Topic: IT acts powers to intercept, monitor and block websites  (Read 1066 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline advbose

  • Sr. Legal Expert
  • ****
  • Posts: 142
  • Karma: +2/-0
  • Welcome to legal Service India - law forum for free legal Information
    • View Profile
IT acts powers to intercept, monitor and block websites
« on: July 30, 2013, 04:56:06 AM »
Until the passage of this Section in the ITAA, phone tapping was governed by Clause 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act of 1885, which said that “On the occurrence of any public emergency, or in the interest of the public safety, the Government may, if satisfied that it is necessary or expedient so to do in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States or public order or for preventing incitement to the commission of an offence, for reasons to be recorded in writing, by order, direct that any message or class of messages to or from any person or class of persons, or relating to any particular subject, brought for transmission by or transmitted or received by any telegraph, shall not be transmitted, or shall be intercepted or detained, or shall be disclosed to the Government making the order or an officer thereof mentioned in the order”. Other sections of the act mention that the government should formulate “precautions to be taken for preventing the improper interception or disclosure of messages”. There have been many attempts, rather many requests, to formulate rules to govern the operation of Clause 5(2). But ever since 1885,

no government has formulated any such precautions, maybe for obvious reasons to retain the spying powers for almost a century.

 A writ petition was filed in the Supreme Court in 1991 by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties, challenging the constitutional validity of this Clause 5(2). The petition argued that it infringed the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression and to life and personal liberty. In December 1996, the Supreme Court delivered its judgment, pointing out that “unless a public emergency has occurred or the interest of public safety demands, the authorities have no jurisdiction to exercise the powers” given them under 5(2). They went on to define them thus: a public emergency was the “prevailing of a sudden condition or state of affairs affecting the people at large calling for immediate action”, and public safety “means the state or condition of freedom from danger or risk for the people at large”. Without those two, however “necessary or expedient”, it could not do so. Procedures for keeping such records and the layer of authorities etc were also stipulated.

 

File a Consumer Complaint
Property verification
Call: 9873628941
 

Lawyers in India - Listed city wise Mumbai
Bangalore
Pune
Pondicherry
Jaipur
lawyers in London
lawyers in Birmingham
Chennai
Allahabad
Ahmedabad
Jodhpur
Indore
lawyers in Toronto
lawyers in Sydney

Cochin
Lucknow
Ranchi
Thane
Janjgir
lawyers in Milan
Johannesburg

Delhi - New Delhi
Chandigarh
Surat
Nashik
lawyers in New York
los Angeles
Kolkata
Hyderabad
Rajkot
Nagpur
lawyers in Dhaka
lawyers in Dubai

Copyright Registration

Ph no: 9891244487

For Mutual consent Divorce in Delhi - Ph no: 9650499965

Home | Bare Acts | Law Forms | Supreme Court Judgments | Legal Advice | Lawyers | Submit article | Sitemap | Contact Us

legal Service India.com is Copyrighted under the Registrar of Copyright Act ( Govt of India) © 2000-2016
Get Free legal Advice here from top notch lawyers in India