Latest news with #InformationTechnologyAct2000
The Hindu
3 days ago
- General
- The Hindu
Telangana Forensic Lab is now ‘examiner of digital evidence'
The Telangana Forensic Science Laboratory (TGFSL) was designated as a 'Government Examiner of Electronic Evidence' under Section 79A of the Information Technology Act 2000, by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), Government of India, on Wednesday. With this notification, the NABL-accredited TGFSL is now empowered to examine, analyse, and certify digital evidence. This development not only enhances the admissibility of such evidence in courts across the country but also boosts the lab's legal authority and institutional credibility. 'The lab's Digital Forensics Division handles an average of 50 cases a month involving diverse digital storage formats and devices that include damaged hard drives and mobile phones. This wing has contributed significantly to several high-profile convictions in Telangana,' said Director General of TGFSL Shikha Goel. Notably, TGFSL has also set a national benchmark by prioritising forensic reports in POCSO cases, in accordance with Supreme Court directions.
United News of India
4 days ago
- Business
- United News of India
TN CB-CID unearths multi-crore Iridium Copper scam posing as RBI officials, six held
Chennai, June 3 (UNI) In a significant breakthrough, the Tamil Nadu Crime Branch-CID wing has unearthed a multi-crore Iridium Copper scam by the culprits posing as RBI officials and arrested six people in this connection. A CB-CID release here on Tuesday said those arrested included five from Tamil Nadu and one from Telangana and several incriminating materials were seized from them. It was a case of cheating of public by some groups across Tamil Nadu and neighbouring states by collecting unauthorized deposits claiming that several thousand crore rupees has been received from the central government through RBI for the sale of iridium copper. They also con them saying service fee has to be paid to RBI and commission has to be paid to higher officials of RBI to release the said amount. These scamsters assure exorbitant returns in the range of crores by showing fabricated RBI bonds to make the victims believe their scam. The scam came to light when a complaint was lodged by a civilian in February 2024 on the 'Sachet' website of Reserve Bank of India for lodging complaints against unauthorized deposit accepted by unincorporated bodies. Subsequently, a complaint was filed by RBI Assistant General Manager A.J. Kennedy in May 2024 to the Chennai Police Commissioner and the same was directed to the CBCID. After conducting a preliminary enquiry, a case has been registered in Salem OCU CBCID unit U/s 419, 465, 468, 471, 420 IPC and 66 D Information Technology Act 2000 r/w five Emblems and Name (Prevention of Improper use) Act, 1950 and taken up for investigation in March 2025. During investigation, the accused persons Nithyanandham, Chandra (both from Thanjavur district of Tamil Nadu) were arrested and remanded on May 28. Further investigations led to the arrest of four more accused Anbumani from Dharmapuri district, Muthusamy a native of Salem district, Kesavan also from Salem and Gadi Charla Kishore Kumar of of Telangana state. They were subsequently remanded in custody. The release said a gold-coloured metal, few forged documents, Cell phones with incriminating materials have been seized from the accused persons. Inquiries revealed that the accused have cheated many people across Tamil Nadu and in Andhra Pradesh. So far, around 20 victims from Chennai, Thanjavur, Coimbatore, Salem, Namakkal and Dharmapuri, have been identified and said to have been cheated of money to the tune of Rs 4.5 crores collectively by the accused persons. The scamsters induced victims to invest money in the allegedly secretly maintained central government Iridium trade scheme by showing forged credit certificates in the name of the depositors with RBI emblem. Thereafter, when the victims contacted them for the promised returns, the accused kept dodging them. After a point, they hired persons to pose as RBI officials and meet the victims in star hotels in Delhi or Mumbai and assure them of returns. Once this is done, they even go to the extent of creating a bank account and share credentials with the victims saying money will be deposited in this account. Investigation is going on to arrest remaining persons of this racket and to identify more victims. UNI GV 0630
Indian Express
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
As Sena MLA alleges social media ‘misuse' by Kunal Kamra and others, HC suggests approaching competent forum
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday disposed of a PIL petition filed by an MLA belonging to Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde's Shiv Sena, raising concerns over 'misuse' of social media platforms by influencers, content creators and comedians. A bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Makarand S Karnik said the reliefs sought by Rajapur MLA Kiran Samant were general in nature and that he had efficacious remedy available under the Information Technology Rules to make a complaint to the nodal officer seeking blocking of access to such 'misinformation'. In his plea, Samant sought directions for the Union Ministry of Information and Technology, Google and standup comedian Kunal Kamra. The division bench was informed by Samant's lawyer that the MLA was 'disturbed by alarming trends where influential people under the garb of free speech are spreading misinformation and launching unwarranted attacks on the judiciary and shaking very foundation of Indian democratic system'. Seeking to cite an example of alleged misuse of social media, Samant said that comedian Kunal Kamra was a respondent in the case. An FIR was registered against Kamra last month for cracking an allegedly objectionable joke on Deputy Chief Minister Shinde during a standup comedy show. Chief Justice Aradhe orally remarked that while certain content may amount to misuse of social media as per the petitioner, others may see it as an exercise of their freedom of speech, adding that the petitioner cannot determine what it is. Senior advocate Darius Khambata, representing Kamra, said the law prescribes sufficient remedies to the petitioner to complain against certain content and seek its blocking. The court referred to provisions of the Information Technology Act 2000 and the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules 2009. 'Thus, it is evident (from Rule 6) that an aggrieved person has the forum available under the 2009 Rules to seek redressal of blocking of content and even in cases of emergency, to seek blocking of information under Rule 8,' the bench noted. The bench added that the MLA had not invoked the 'efficacious remedy' but approached the court instead, 'seeking the relief in wide terms, which cannot be granted.' The bench noted that Rule 3 (1) (b) (v) of the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021, which allowed the government to establish a fact check unit to identify 'fake news' on social media was struck down by the high court last year. The high court had passed a decision with a majority of judges (2 out of 3) ruling against the provision and an appeal against the order is pending before the Supreme Court. Referring to another prayer in the petition, the high court further said the formation of the social media vigilance and censor committee against content violating reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech and expressions provided under Article 19 (2) of the Constitution was in the 'realm of policy decision' and that a direction cannot be issued outside the scope of the Rules. 'The petitioner himself is a lawmaker and it is open for him to take appropriate action if so advised,' it noted. The bench said the relief sought by Samant—a direction for the IT Ministry to disclose steps taken to implement the IT Act and 2021 Rules—'is couched in general and in very wide terms'. However, it granted him liberty to approach the authority concerned.
Indian Express
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Block Swiss encrypted email service Proton Mail, Karnataka High Court to Centre
The Karnataka High Court Tuesday directed the Centre to block the Swiss secure email service Proton Mail in the country. A single-judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna also asked the government to take steps to block the offending URLs of Proton Mail until the encrypted email service is blocked in India. In this case, a Bengaluru firm, M Moser Design Associates, had approached the high court about the alleged targeting of some women employees using the Proton Mail service, wherein emails with obscene content, including AI-generated 'deepfake' images, had been sent. The petition called for agreements between India and Switzerland to obtain information and documents regarding the sender of the offensive emails and to preserve them. It also called for steps to ban the plaKarnatform. The petitioner's counsel stated that, although the service allowed users to select India as a location, its servers were actually located outside the country. The plea also highlighted previous instances where the platform's blockage was sought on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Police. It also noted that several bomb threats had been sent to schools using the platform. Issuing an order in favour of the petitioner, the bench stated, 'Mandamus issued to respondents- Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY) and Ministry of Communications to initiate proceedings in terms of Section 69A of the Information Technology Act 2000 read with Rule 10 of the IT Procedure and Safeguards of Blocking of Access to Information by Public Access Rules, 2009 to block ProtonMail.' Section 69A of the IT Act gives the government the power to block access to certain information through computer resources. A detailed order is awaited. Previously, the Delhi High Court had directed the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and the Delhi Police to investigate the use of Proton Mail. As reported by the Indian Express, the Delhi High Court matter dealt with a habeas corpus petition. It sought the production of the petitioner's wife and their two minor children after the woman was found to be corresponding with her father over Proton Mail, which the police claimed is banned in India. This March, before the Karnataka High Court, MEITY sent a communication stating that ProtonMail was not actually blocked. It stated, 'MEITY can exercise this power (blocking) upon receipt of a request from a Nodal Officer and after examination and recommendation by the Committee…… action can also be taken under section 69A if so ordered by a competent Court. It is submitted that Proton Mail has not been blocked in India under Section 69A of IT Act, 2000 and is operating in India.'
New Indian Express
30-04-2025
- Business
- New Indian Express
Ban ProtonMail, block offending URLs immediately: Karnataka HC to Centre
BENGALURU: The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday directed the Union Government to block the Switzerland-based ProtonMail in India and to take steps for immediate blocking of the offending Uniform Resource Locator (URLs) of Protonmail till action is taken to block the service. Justice M Nagaprasanna pronounced the operative portion of the order, allowing a petition by M Moser Design Associates India, Bengaluru. The full order is yet to be released. The petitioner moved the high court seeking directions to the Centre to act against Proton AG, pointing out that Proton's servers are located outside India, and it is claiming that it is not bound by Indian laws. While contending that Proton's email service allows users to select India as their location, which gives a false impression that the company is operating from within the country, the petitioner stated that it filed a police complaint in November 2024. It alleged that some unknown persons are misusing Proton Mail to target the company's female employees by sending obscene, abusive and derogatory emails containing AI-generated deep-fake images and explicit content. But not much progress has been made on the police complaint. The police have not utilised the legal assistance agreements and arrangements between India and Switzerland to initiate action against Proton, based on the First Information Report, the petitioner alleged. 'Mandamus issued to respondents- Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (Meity) and Ministry of Communications to initiate proceedings in terms of Section 69A of the Information Technology Act 2000 read with Rule 10 of the IT Procedure and Safeguards of Blocking of Access to Information by Public Access Rules, 2009 to block ProtonMail bearing in mind the observations made in the order. Till such proceedings are taken up and concluded by the Government of India, the offending Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) that are indicated in the petitions should be blocked forthwith,' the court said. The petitioner's counsel submitted that at the instance of Tamil Nadu police, the Union IT Ministry has already sought to block ProtonMail. The court's attention was also drawn to a decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Runa Devi and connected matters which was disposed of on October 23, 2024. In that case, directions were given to the Delhi police as well as the Ministry of Home Affairs to look into the e-mail address/service used, which is allegedly provided by Proton as it is stated to have been banned. Pointing out that there is a mutual agreement of assistance between India and Switzerland and a letter rogatory can be issued by a competent criminal court on the request made by the investigating officer to seek information from another country, the union government contended that it will comply with the directions if same are issued by the court under the relevant rules to ban the offending e-mail service.
