Cyber Hate Crimes In India: A legal perspective


Author:  Divisha Mishra, ICFAI LAW SCHOOL, ICFAI University Dehradun

Abstract

In the digital age, India has witnessed an alarming Surge in cyber hate crimes, reflecting the dark side of technological advancement. With the proliferation of internet access and social media platforms, these crimes have grown in sophistication and impact. Cyber hate crimes include hate speech, threats, and discriminatory actions targeting individuals or communities based on their religion, caste, gender, or other identifiers. Such activities not only disrupt the social fabric but also fuel real- world violence and polarization. This article explores the nature of cyber hate crimes in contemporary India, evaluates the adequacy of the existing legal framework, and highlights the role of technology in evidence collection and prosecution. Recent case laws and governmental measures are analyzed to shed light on the complexities and challenges in addressing these crimes, offering a comprehensive perspective on the issue.
Introduction: cyber hate crimes, a byproduct of technological advancement, exploit the anonymity and reach of the internet to propagate hate speech, defamation, and incitement to violence. Unlike traditional hate crimes, the digital nature of cyber hate allows perpetrators to spread vitriol across borders within seconds.
India, as a multicultural democracy, faces unique challenges due to its diversity. Divisive elements exploit the internet to exacerbate communal, religious, or caste-based tensions. Cyber hate manifests in various forms, such as derogatory posts, doctored images, fake news, and trolling campaigns. The Indian legal framework, although robust, is continually tested by the rapid evolution of technology and the complexities of global internet governance.


In Modern India, hate crimes have become particularly prominent on platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram. Polarizing content, particularly during elections, religious festivals, or contentious events, is often amplified through algorithms that prioritize engagement. This has led to incidents of online mobs targeting individuals with threats, or coordinated trolling campaigns. The emergence of deepfakes and AI- generated hate content adds another layer of complexity, making it harder to distinguish genuine expressions from manipulative content designed to inflame tensions.


Legal Framework in India: India’s approach to combating cyber hate crimes is grounded in constitutional principles and statutory provisions that aim to strike a balance between freedom of speech and protection against harm. The legal framework is multifaceted, encompassing both penal provisions and regulatory guidelines.
Indian Penal Code (IPC) 1860
Section 153A: it prohibits promoting enmity between groups on basis of religion, race , or language. It has been instrumental in addressing communal hate speech online. Courts often examine the intent behind such actions, ensuring that casual or unintentional statement are not penalized.


Section 295A: it criminalizes deliberate acts intend to hurt religious sentiments. This provision is frequently invoked in cases involving offensive online content targeting religious communities.
Section 505(1)(b) and 505(2): focuses on statements that incite public mischief or hatred. These sections address the spread of fake news and incendiary messages on platforms like WhatsApp and Twitter.

Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000
Section 66A: Although the Supreme court struck down in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India ( 2015),  It previously penalized sending “offensive” messages. Its absence has left a gap in addressing certain types of online abuse.
Section 67: it deals with publication or transmition of obscene material in electronic form. While primarily used against pornography, it also applies to hateful imagery or video.
Section 69A: empowers the government to block public access to content that threatens sovereignty, public order, or morality. This section has been invoked in cases involving extremist propaganda and communal hate speech.

New Provisions under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) ,2023
Section 153C: criminalized words, signs, or visible representations that are gravely threating and intended to cause fear, alarm, or incite violence based on religion, caste, gender, or other identifiers. The punishment is given up to imprisonment of two years, a fine of rs.5,000, or both.
Section 505A: penalizes the use of words or signs that cause fear or provoke violence against individuals or groups. These additions aim to address online hate speech more effectively and provide clearer definitions for prosecution.

Constitution of India
The Constitution of India plays a pivotal role in shaping the legal framework to address cyber hate crimes. It provides the foundation for protecting individual rights while imposing reasonable restrictions to ensure public order and harmony. Key constitutional provisions include: 
Article 19(1)(a): this article guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression to every citizen. It allows individuals to voice their opinions, including online, without fear of censorship. However, this right is not absolute.
Article 19(2): this article imposes reasonable restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression in the interest of sovereignty, security, public order, decency, morality, or incitement to an offense. It provides the legal basis for laws that criminalize hate speech and online abuse, striking a balance between individual freedom and societal welfare.
Article 21: it ensures the right to life and personal liberty, which includes the right to live with dignity. Cyber hate crimes, which often lead to harassment and psychological trauma, directly infringe on this constitutional right.
Directive principles of State Policy(DPSP): through non-justiciable, the DPSPs guide the state in formulating laws and policies to promote equality, justice, and the welfare of all citizens. Combating cyber hate crimes aligns with the constitutional goal of ensuring an inclusive society.
The judiciary, as the guardian of the Constitution, often intervenes in cases of cyber hate crimes to ensure that constitutional rights are upheld while enforcing laws to maintain public order. Landmark judgments like shreya singhal v. Union of India demonstrate how constitutional principles are applied to address the challenges posed by online hate speech.
Cybersecurity laws and Global Cooperation : India recognizes the importance of global cooperation in combating cyber hate crimes. The transnational nature of cyber offenses necessitates international collaboration to ensure justice and accountability.
Domestic Initiatives
Cyber Swachhta Kendra: established under the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, this program focuses on detecting and mitigating cyber security threats.
Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre(I4C): functions as a nodal agency to coordinate law enforcement efforts against cybercrime across the country.
National Cyber Security Policy: Aims to build a secure and resilient cyberspace, with provisions for capacity- building and enhanced vigilance.

International Cooperation
Budapest Convention on Cybercrime: Although India is not a signatory, this treaty serves as a model for drafting comprehensive cybercrime laws. It facilitates information sharing and mutual legal assistance among member states.
INTERPOL’s Cybercrime Programme: India collaborates with INTERPOL to combat transnational cybercrimes, including hate speech and online harassment.
G20 Digital Economy Initiatives: India actively participates in discussions to establish global frameworks for tackling cyber threats and promoting internet governance.

Evidence and Proof In Cyber Hate Crimes: proving cyber hate crimes requires meticulous evidence collection and adherence to procedural laws. The digital nature of these crimes necessitates reliance on electronic evidence, which presents unique challenges:
Admissibility of Evidence:  Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, says electronic records need to be certified for admissibility. This provision ensures authenticity and reduces the risk of tampering.
Expanded provisions:-
Digital Forensics:  courts increasingly rely on metadata analysis, IP address tracking, and blockchain verification to establish evidence.
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023:  recent provisions introduced under BSA,2023 focus on streamlining the authentication of digital records and holding intermediaries accountable for preserving evidence.
Judicial precedents:-
Anvar P.V. V.P.K. Basheer(2014):- says that certification is necessary for admissibility of electronic evidence.
Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018):- allowed exceptions to certification requirements when the original device is unavailable.
Role of Technology:- forensic tools like metadata extraction, geo-location tracking, and server log analysis are critical in identified perpetrators. Cooperation from intermediaries like social media companies is often sought under the IT Act.
Traceability Mandates:- Recent amendments require social media platforms to implement traceability of messages under the IT Rules,2021, facilitating law enforcement in identifying offenders.

Case Laws:-
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India(2015):- Struck down Section 66A of the IT Act, emphasizing the need for precision in laws addressing online hate speech.
Ameesha Patel v. State of Maharashtra (2021):- The Bombay High Court underscored swift action against cyber hate crimes to prevent societal harm.
Pravasi Bhalai Sangathan v. Union of India(2014):- Highlighted the responsibility of law enforcement to act against hate speech and enforce existing laws rigorously.
Facebook v. Union of India(2020):- focused on the accountability of social media platforms in regulating hate speech and complying with law enforcement.
Swami Ramdev v. Facebook Inc. (2019):- Addressed the cross- border jurisdiction of social media content removal and the responsibility of platforms to take down hateful posts globally.
Hitesh Bhatia v. State of Gujarat(2022):- Highlighted the prosecution of individuals spreading hate speech against particular communities on social media platforms.
Tanvi Seth and Anas Siddiqui Passport Case (2018):- illustrate how misinformation and hateful narratives on social media can escalate communal tension.

Challenges in Combating Cyber Hate Crimes
Anonymity:- perpetrators often use pseudonyms and encryption tools, complicating identification.
Jurisdictional Issues:- the global nature of the internet creates enforcement challenges, especially when servers and perpetrators are located abroad.
Volume of cases:- law enforcement agencies are overwhelmed by the sheer number of online hate crime reports.
Free speech v. Regulation:- striking a balance between curbing hate speech and preserving constitutional freedoms remains contentious.
Delayed Response:- the slow pace of investigations and lack of technical expertise hinder effective prosecution.
Algorithmic Bias:- Social media algorithms often amplify controversial content, inadvertently fostering hate speech.
Deep fakes and AI- generated Hate Content:- advanced technologies are being used to create realistic yet false narratives, further complicating the battle against cyber hate crimes.

Government Initiatives and Measures
Cyber Crime Reporting Portal:- launched to streamline reporting and redressal of online hate crimes.
Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre:- strengthens investigative capabilities and promotes inter-agency coordination.
Awareness Campaigns:- programs like “ Cyber Swachhta Kendra” educate users on online safety and responsible behavior.
Legislative proposals:- the government is exploring amendments to existing laws to better address evolving cyber threats.
Partnerships with social media:- agreements with platforms like Meta and Google facilitate proactive content moderation and user accountability.
IT Rules,2021:- mandate greater accountability from social media intermediaries, including grievance redressal mechanism and traceability of originators of hate content.

Conclusion: The rise of cyber hate crimes underscores the urgent need for a multifaceted approach involving legal reforms, technological innovation, and public awareness. India’s legal framework provides a foundation, but its effectiveness depends on consistent enforcement, judicial vigilance and the active participation of internet intermediaries. Courts must ensure timely and fair adjudication, while law enforcement agencies need to be equipped with advanced tools to tackle the ever-evolving nature of cyber threats.
efforts should also focus on creating a culture of digital responsibility. Public campaigns to educate citizens about online etiquette, reporting mechanisms, and the consequences of hate speech are crucial. At the same time, collaboration with global stakeholders is necessary to curb the transnational nature of cyber hate crimes. By fostering inclusivity and responsibility, India can protect its digital spaces from becoming platforms for hostility and division. Only through a united effort can the country ensure a safer and more harmonious cyberspace for all.

FAQS


What constitutes a cyber hate crime ?
Cyber hate crime involve the use of digital platforms to propagate hate speech, harassment, threats, or offensive content targeting individuals or communities based on religion, caste, gender, ethnicity, or other identifiers. These crimes often incite hostility and violence, both online and offline.


What legal provision in India address cyber hate crimes?
Key provisions include:
Sections 153A, 295A, and 505 of the Indian Penal Code(IPC) for inciting enmity, outraging religious sentiments, and spreading public mischief.
Section 67 of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 for publication of obscene content.
Sections 153C AND 505A of The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS),2023 addressing specific acts of hate speech and provocation.


How does the constitution of India safeguard against cyber hate crimes?
The Constitution ensures freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) but imposes reasonable restrictions under Article 19 (2) to prevent misuse leading to hate speech or incitement to violence. Article 21 protects individual’s dignity, which cyber hate crimes often violate.


How does section 65B of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, apply to cyber hate crimes?
Section 65B mandates the certification of electronic records for admissibility in courts. This ensures the authenticity and reliability of digital evidence, which is crucial for prosecuting cyber hate crimes.


What challenges are associated with combating cyber hate crimes in India?
Key challenges include:
The anonymity of offenders online.
The rapid dissemination of hate content.
The lack of awareness regarding legal remedies.
Technical issues in collecting and authenticating electronic evidence.


What role do social media platforms play in addressing cyber hate crimes? 
Under the IT Rules, 2021, social media platforms must implement grievance redressal mechanism, remove harmful content promptly, and ensure traceability of offensive messages to assist law enforcement in tracking perpetrators.


What recent case highlight India’s response to cyber hate crimes?
Ameesha Patel v. State of Maharashtra(2021): highlighted the legal consequences of sharing offensive content online.


How does international cooperation contribute to combating cyber hate crimes?
India collaborates with global initiatives like the Budapest convention on Cybercrime and INTERPOL’s Cybercrime Programme. These frameworks facilitate sharing best practices, mutual legal assistance, and tracking cross border offenders.


What can individuals do to protect themselves from cyber hate crimes?
Report offensive content to platform moderators or law enforcement.
Use privacy settings to control online interactions.
Educate oneself about cyber laws and remedies.
Avoid sharing or engaging with inflammatory content.


How can victims of cyber hate crimes seek legal redress in India?
Victims can:
File a complaint with local cybercrime police station or through the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal.
Gather and preserve digital evidence, including screenshots and URLs.
Seek assistance from legal experts to navigate the applicable laws and provisions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *