In a significant judgment underscoring the nuances of digital expression and legal accountability, the Allahabad High Court has ruled that merely “liking” a post on social media does not amount to “publishing” or “transmitting” content under Section 67 of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000.
The ruling came in the case of Imran Khan v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, where Justice Saurabh Srivastava emphasized that Section 67, which criminalizes the publication or transmission of obscene material online, is limited to content that is lascivious or appeals to prurient interests. It does not extend to provocative or politically sensitive material.
“Liking a post will not amount to publishing or transmitting the post… therefore, merely liking a post will not attract Section 67 of the IT Act,” the Court observed.
The petitioner, Imran Khan, was accused of engaging in online activity that allegedly incited unlawful assembly. According to police reports, Khan had liked a Facebook post by one Chaudhari Farhan Usman concerning a planned protest. Authorities claimed this interaction helped mobilize a crowd of 600–700 individuals near a district collectorate for a procession without official permission.
While multiple charges were invoked under the Indian Penal Code, the Uttar Pradesh police also booked Khan under Section 67 of the IT Act. However, the Court found no direct content authored or disseminated by Khan. His legal counsel contended that no provocative posts were present on Khan’s social media profiles. Even though authorities alleged deletion of content, the material relied upon was not authored or shared by the petitioner.
The Court concluded that “liking” a post cannot be equated with active publication or transmission under the law. It further clarified that Section 67 is strictly applicable to obscene content and not to speech that is provocative or political in nature.
“The words ‘lascivious’ or ‘appeals to the prurient interest’ relate to sexual content. Section 67 does not prescribe punishment for provocative material,” the Court held.
Accordingly, the High Court quashed the case against Imran Khan, noting the absence of any incriminating content directly linked to him.
Advocates Abhishek Ankur Chaurasia and Diwan Saifullah Khan represented the petitioner in the matter.
