State (NCT of Delhi) v. Mahesh
In the High Court of Delhi
Crl L P 667/2016
Before Justice G S Sistani and Justice Vinod Goel
Decided on April 12, 2017

Relevancy of the case: Leave to appeal in a case involving transmission and publication of sexually explicit content

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 67A)
• The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 378(1), 164, 313)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 376D, 384, 341, 120B, 34)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The prosecutrix, on 04.08.2013, went to the Police Station Fatehpur, Beri, and stated that she was raped by her brother-in-law.
• Her sister-in-law, Sonwati, who lived in front of her house had called her to shift her fridge.
• Upon reaching the room, Sonwati bolted the room from outside and the prosecutrix was locked inside the room with Mahesh. He threatened to kill her with a knife and asked her to remove her clothes to commit sexual intercourse against her will and recorded the same on his phone.
• It was further revealed that the respondent threatened her to make the video public in case she failed to furnish an amount of Rs.50,000.
• The trial court acquitted the respondent upon finding no evidence after examining thirteen witnesses against the respondent. The court opined in consonance with a witness that the face of the person filming the video was not visible.
• Therefore, the State had approached the High Court seeking to appeal from the order of acquittal of the respondent only under Section 67A of the IT Act, 2000.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates 

• The counsel for the State relied upon the witness, Sant Ram (prosecutrix’s husband) who recognised the voice in the video as that of the respondent Mahesh.

Opinion of the Bench

• The court relied on the trial court’s order that the prosecution had failed to prove that it was the respondent in the video. Further, there was no concrete evidence to prove that the video was transmitted by the respondent’s phone to prove the application of Section 67A.
• The court further relied on the quintessential principle of criminal jurisprudence that the presumption of innocence of the accused is reinforced by the order of acquittal. 

Final Decision

• Appeal dismissed.

This case summary has been prepared by Tuba Aftab, an undergraduate student at IIMT & School of Law, GGSIPU, during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in May/June 2021.