Online Stalking And Cyberbullying Offences
1. Overview of Online Stalking and Cyberbullying
Online stalking refers to the repeated use of the internet, social media, or electronic communication to harass, intimidate, or threaten someone. Cyberbullying is the use of digital communication to bully, humiliate, or threaten a person, often repeatedly.
Common forms include:
Harassment via social media, emails, or messaging apps
Threats of violence or intimidation online
Spreading false information or defamatory content
Sharing private images without consent (revenge porn)
Identity theft or impersonation for harassment
Legal framework (India):
Indian Penal Code (IPC): Sections 503 (criminal intimidation), 354D (stalking), 509 (insulting modesty of a woman), 500 (defamation)
Information Technology Act, 2000: Section 66A (now struck down but previously covered offensive messages), Section 66E (violation of privacy), Section 67 (obscene content)
International: Cybercrime laws in the USA, UK, and EU cover harassment, stalking, and bullying online
Penalties: imprisonment, fines, restraining orders, and confiscation of digital devices.
2. Detailed Case Law Examples
Case 1: Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015, India)
Facts:
The case challenged Section 66A of the IT Act, which criminalized sending offensive messages online. While primarily a free speech case, it had implications for cyber harassment.
Legal Issue:
Whether overly broad criminal provisions could be applied to online harassment or cyberbullying.
Ruling:
Supreme Court struck down Section 66A as unconstitutional but upheld that targeted harassment, threats, or stalking online can still attract liability under IPC Sections 503, 354D, and 509.
Significance:
Clarified the scope of online harassment laws and reinforced that cyberbullying remains criminal under other provisions.
Case 2: State of Maharashtra v. Bharat (2013, India)
Facts:
Bharat repeatedly sent threatening messages and emails to his ex-girlfriend, including sexual threats.
Legal Issue:
Criminal liability under IPC Section 354D (stalking) and IT Act Section 66A/67.
Ruling:
The court convicted Bharat, sentencing him to imprisonment and fine. It emphasized that repeated electronic communication causing fear or distress constitutes stalking.
Significance:
First few cases where Indian courts explicitly recognized online stalking as a cognizable offence.
Case 3: Cyberbullying of a Minor – R v. DPP (UK, 2012)
Facts:
A teenager posted derogatory messages and doctored images of another minor on social media.
Legal Issue:
Violation of UK Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and Malicious Communications Act 1988.
Ruling:
The court convicted the teenager for harassment and malicious communications, sentencing him to community service and restraining orders.
Significance:
Demonstrated that cyberbullying of minors is treated as a criminal offence with significant legal consequences.
Case 4: Doe v. United States (USA, 2014)
Facts:
The defendant created fake social media profiles to harass and threaten a former partner, including threatening emails.
Legal Issue:
Violation of federal and state cyberstalking laws.
Ruling:
Convicted under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and federal cyberstalking statutes, with imprisonment and prohibition from using electronic communication to contact the victim.
Significance:
Highlighted the application of criminal law to online impersonation and persistent harassment.
Case 5: People v. Jane Doe (California, USA, 2016)
Facts:
A college student posted intimate photos of a former partner online without consent (revenge porn).
Legal Issue:
Violation of California Penal Code Section 647(j)(4) (revenge porn) and harassment statutes.
Ruling:
Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment and mandatory registration as a sex offender.
Significance:
Clarified that sharing private content online without consent constitutes cyber harassment and criminal liability.
Case 6: State of Karnataka v. Rakesh (2018, India)
Facts:
Rakesh continuously sent vulgar and threatening messages to a colleague over WhatsApp.
Legal Issue:
Criminal liability under IPC Sections 354D, 509, 503 and IT Act Sections 66E/67.
Ruling:
Convicted and sentenced to 1 year imprisonment and fine. Court emphasized that online harassment targeting women is particularly serious.
Significance:
Established that digital stalking and bullying are actionable offenses under Indian law.
Case 7: Facebook Cyberbullying Case – R v. Stephens (UK, 2017)
Facts:
Stephens repeatedly bullied a co-worker on Facebook, including threats of violence and public humiliation.
Legal Issue:
Violation of Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and Malicious Communications Act 1988.
Ruling:
Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment with a restraining order.
Significance:
Emphasized that social media platforms do not shield offenders from criminal liability.
3. Key Principles from Case Law
Repeated online harassment = criminal liability under IPC 354D (stalking) and harassment laws internationally.
Defamation, humiliation, and threats online = punishable under IPC 500, 509, and IT Act provisions.
Cyberbullying minors = treated with enhanced penalties in most jurisdictions.
Revenge porn / non-consensual image sharing = specific offences with serious prison terms.
Impersonation or fake profiles used to threaten = criminally actionable.
International trend: All major democracies recognize online stalking and cyberbullying as criminal offences.
RELATED Blog
comments