#Information Technology Act

The Gauhati High Court ruled that DigiLocker documents satisfy the evidentiary standards of the IT Act 2000, making them as valid as paper originals. Consequently, the show-cause notices issued to transport firms over allegedly forged truck papers were struck down, safeguarding entities that rely on electronic records.

The Bombay High Court granted bail to an accused in a ₹1.95 crore digital gold fraud, conditioning release on depositing ₹13 lakh of alleged proceeds and mandatory monthly police reporting. This sets a precedent for financial accountability measures in cyber fraud bail orders, reinforcing that even non-violent digital crimes may require active restitution and surveillance as bail conditions under the new BNSS framework.

Madhya Pradesh High Court granted anticipatory bail to an applicant accused of biometric fraud in the MP Police Constable Exam, despite charges under BNS, IT Act, and Aadhaar Act. The court emphasized judicial discretion over the gravity of the offence, setting a precedent for bail in identity fraud cases involving competitive exams.

Jharkhand High Court grants anticipatory bail to a housewife framed in a cyber fraud scheme, holding that mere account usage without criminal intent or knowledge of fraudulent transactions does not justify detention. The ruling underscores the need for prima facie evidence of active participation in cyber offences under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and IT Act.

Himachal Pradesh HC quashes FIR under Sections 78, 79 BNS (compoundable under Section 359 BNSS) and Section 67A IT Act after parties compromise, reinforcing that criminal proceedings serve no purpose where offences are private and compoundable. The ruling aligns with binding precedents on quashing FIRs post-compromise in non-public offences.

The Chhattisgarh High Court ruled that Section 67A of the IT Act requires concrete evidence of intentional transmission or viral circulation of intimate content-not just prior consensual exchange-to sustain a criminal charge. This sets a critical precedent for digital privacy cases, shielding individuals from prosecution based on unsubstantiated allegations of sharing private material.

The Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench ruled that failure to produce administrative documents does not equate to criminal falsification under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, granting anticipatory bail to a headmistress. This clarifies that bureaucratic oversight, absent dishonest intent, cannot trigger custodial prosecution under cyber and fraud provisions, protecting public servants from overreach in administrative fraud probes.

MP High Court grants bail in a case involving sharing of intimate photographs, holding that consent and adult agency negate automatic denial of bail under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The ruling emphasizes that pre-trial detention is unjustified where the prosecutrix was a consenting party, reinforcing bail as a rule under Article 21.

The Bombay High Court granted an ad-interim John Doe injunction to block ransomware actors threatening to expose 1TB of confidential client data, affirming that digital extortion falls within the scope of the IT Act and IPC. This sets a critical precedent for businesses facing cyber ransom threats, enabling swift legal intervention before data is leaked.

Bombay High Court grants anticipatory bail where digital evidence is seized and no custodial interrogation is needed, reinforcing that arrest is not automatic under BNS and IT Act offences.

Bombay High Court grants interim injunction against anonymous online defamatory campaigns, directing Proton AG to disclose user data and blocking defamatory content.

Jharkhand High Court denies anticipatory bail where petitioner exploited consensual relationship to create fake accounts, send obscene content, and blackmail informant under BNS and IT Act.