Advanced Search Results

X Corp vs Union of India

Court : Karnataka

UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT DECLARING THAT SECTION 79(3)(b) OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000 (IT ACT) DOES NOT CONFER AUTHORITY TO ISSUE INFORMATION BLOCKING ORDERS UNDER THE IT ACT, AND FURTHER DECLARE … BLOCKING ORDERS UNDER THE IT ACT, AND FURTHER DECLARE THAT INFORMATION BLOCKING ORDERS CAN ONLY BE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 69A OF THE IT ACT READ WITH THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (PROCEDURE AND SAFEGUARDS FOR BLOCKING FOR ACCESS OF INFORMATION

Shreya Singhal Vs. U.O.I.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

over the internet is included within its reach. It will be useful to note that Section 2(v) of Information Technology Act, 2000 defines information as follows: "2. Definitions.-(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- (v) "Information" includes data, … any other electronic record, which may be transmitted with the message."[1].2. A related challenge is also made to Section 69A introduced by the same amendment which reads as follows:- "69-A. Power to issue directions for blocking for public

M Moser Design Associates India Pvt Ltd vs State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

Crime No.876 of 2024 comes to be registered for offences punishable under Sections 66, 66C and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for short). The learned Magistrate then seeks status report from the hands … conferred under the Copyright Act, 1957 (14 of 1957) or the Patents Act, 1970 (39 of 1970).”(Emphasis supplied) Section 69A deals with power to issue directions for blocking for public access any information through any computer source. The

Sasidharan M.G. vs Union of India

Court : Kerala

the other publishers of content in cable television networks and the internet (including the intermediaries as defined under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and private persons) on the proper use and publication of images/ audio and video; ii. to issue a … there is a need for taking action in relation to the reasons enumerated in sub- section (1) of section 69A of the Act, it may recommend such action.(vi) The Ministry would consider the recommendations of the Inter- Departmental

Christian Louboutin Sas vs.nakul Bajaj & Ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

e-commerce platform be termed as intermediary?.11. Does e-commerce website automatically come under the definition of intermediary?. As per the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter, ‘IT Act’) an `intermediary’ is defined as under: company which every runs an “Section 2(w) “intermediary”, with … Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The challenge was to the constitutional validity of Section 66A and Section 69A of the IT Act and the scope of responsibility of an intermediary under Section 79 of the IT

Sameer Johry vs Union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

submits that the framework governingintermediary liability is provided under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000, read with the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, (hereinafter, IT Rules, 2021) which prescribe due diligence obligations … play a significant role in the dissemination of such information on the internet.90. The respondent submits that under Section 69A of the InformationTechnology Act, 2000, (hereinafter, IT Act, 2000) the Central Government is empowered to direct blocking of

Laksh Vir Singh Yadav vs Union of India & Ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

submits that the framework governingintermediary liability is provided under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000, read with the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, (hereinafter, IT Rules, 2021) which prescribe due diligence obligations … play a significant role in the dissemination of such information on the internet.90. The respondent submits that under Section 69A of the InformationTechnology Act, 2000, (hereinafter, IT Act, 2000) the Central Government is empowered to direct blocking of

Rajesh Rameshchandra Sharma vs Union of India and Ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

submits that the framework governingintermediary liability is provided under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000, read with the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, (hereinafter, IT Rules, 2021) which prescribe due diligence obligations … play a significant role in the dissemination of such information on the internet.90. The respondent submits that under Section 69A of the InformationTechnology Act, 2000, (hereinafter, IT Act, 2000) the Central Government is empowered to direct blocking of

Dr. Ishwarprasad Gilada vs Union of India and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

submits that the framework governingintermediary liability is provided under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000, read with the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, (hereinafter, IT Rules, 2021) which prescribe due diligence obligations … play a significant role in the dissemination of such information on the internet.90. The respondent submits that under Section 69A of the InformationTechnology Act, 2000, (hereinafter, IT Act, 2000) the Central Government is empowered to direct blocking of

Sanjeev Sehgal vs Union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Right to Information

submits that the framework governingintermediary liability is provided under Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000, read with the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, (hereinafter, IT Rules, 2021) which prescribe due diligence obligations … play a significant role in the dissemination of such information on the internet.90. The respondent submits that under Section 69A of the InformationTechnology Act, 2000, (hereinafter, IT Act, 2000) the Central Government is empowered to direct blocking of