Advanced Search Results

Justice k.s.puttaswamy(retd) Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Right to Information

off and implementation of the Aadhaar scheme.7) On March 03, 2006, approval was given by the Department of Information Technology, Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, Government of India for the project titled ‘Unique Identification for BPL Families’ … and annual report of the Authority.36) Chapter VI deals with the important aspects pertaining to ‘protection of information’. Section 28 of the Aadhaar Act puts an obligation on the Authority to ensure the security of identity information and … inalienable rights are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Second Amendment to the US Constitution refers inter alia to security of person, while

Snapdeal Private Limited Vs. State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

is an intermediary as defined under Section 2(1)(w) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, as amended by the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, and is therefore entitled to the exemption from liability in terms of Section 79 Information Technology Act, 2000, … M/s. Pepsi Foods Ltd and anr. vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and Ors (1998) 5 SCC749 more particularly para 28 thereof which is hereunder reproduced for easy reference:28. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a

Sri. Kunal Bahl Vs. State Of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Subject : Land Acquisition

is an intermediary as defined under Section 2(1)(w) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, as amended by the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, and is therefore entitled to the exemption from liability in terms of Section 79 Information Technology Act, 2000, … M/s. Pepsi Foods Ltd and anr. vs. Special Judicial Magistrate and Ors (1998) 5 SCC749 more particularly para 28 thereof which is hereunder reproduced for easy reference:28. Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a

Manoj Oswal Vs. the State of Maharashtra, Through Sr.P.i and Another

Court : Mumbai

Subject : Right to Information

punishable. 28 This aspect becomes very clear if one peruses Section 66 which has been substituted by the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 (10 of 2009) w.e.f. 27.10.2009. That Section 66 reads as under: “66. Computer related offences: If any person,

A.a Abdulla vs Union of India

Court : Kerala

Subject : Education

offences involved are punishable under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008.2. The prosecution allegation in short is as follows:The petitioner received a telephone call on 20.07.2024 from an … IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(CRL.) NO. 1376 OF 2024 PETITIONER: A.A ABDULLA AGED 75

Muhammed Sadhique P K vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Subject : Right to Information

offences punishable under Sections 420 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008.3. The prosecution case is that, while the defactocomplainant was studying Online share trading through You Tube, the … IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1947 BAIL APPL. NO. 2764 OF 2025 CRIME NO.423/2024 OF PARIYARAM

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs. A Kalaimani

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Right to Information

465, 468, 471, 417, 4 201, 120B of IPC and Section 66 read with 43 (1) of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. A Writ Petition was filed before the Madurai Bench of 7. the Madras High Court challenging the Notification … RAO, J.Leave granted. The Teachers Recruitment Board (hereinafter referred 1. to as the ‘Board’) issued a notification on 28.07.2017 inviting applications for selection to the posts of Lecturers in Government Polytechnic Colleges in the State of Tamil

Jibin vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

registered for the offences under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. The 2 nd respondent is the defacto complainant.3. According to the prosecution, on 12.10.2023 and on 30.10.2023,the accused … 1946 CRIME NO.49/2024 OF SULTHAN BATHERY POLICE STATION, Wayanad PETITIONERS/ ACCUSED NO. 1 TO 4 :1 JIBIN AGED 28 YEARS, S/O ANIL, BADANIYA HOUSE, POOJAPPURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695012 2 ANANTHU AGED 29 YEARS, S/O VENUGOPAL,

Ranchodmal Rathod Vs The State Rep By, The Inspector of Police

Court : Chennai

No.7 of 2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of IPC and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. The complaint is that the defacto complainant was approached and he was asked to join the Wazzup group … the amounts were withheld and the petitioner could not withdraw the amount of Rs.4,00,000/- which got credited on 28.12.2023. When the defacto complainant contacted, he was asked to pay another Rs.30,00,000/- more and finding the foul play,

Anil Kumar vs State of Kerala

Court : Kerala

Subject : Education

the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 68 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 as per the order dated 26.08.2022 in S.C. No.361/2019 on the files of the trial court. The order … ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT (SPECIAL COURT FOR TRIAL FOR MARADU CASES) KOZHIKODEREVISION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS.21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 32, 33, 35 AND 36 (ORIGINAL ACCUSED NOS.29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 40, 41, 43 AND