NITIN JAMDAR, SARANG V.KOTWAL
Rashmi Uday Shukla – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Nitin Jamdar, J.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive service. Taken for disposal.
2. On 26 March 2021, the Respondent No.2-Assistant Commissioner of Police filed a First Information Report at the Cyber Crime Police Station, Mumbai, with the allegation that on 23 March 2021, Mr. Devendra Fadnavis, the Leader of the Opposition, in an interview on a television news channel produced a copy of the secret/confidential letter addressed by Ms. Rashmi Shukla, the Commissioner State Intelligence Department to the Director-General of Police. It was also alleged that the Leader of the Opposition also showed a pen drive containing sensitive and confidential material concerning the police force in Maharashtra obtained by State Intelligence Department through interception. Crime C.R. No.02 of 2021 was registered with Cyber Cell, BKC, Bandra (East) against unknown persons on the allegation that confidential material received through legal interception was illegally obtained and supplied to an unauthorised person, thereby committing offences under the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Information Technology Act, 2000 and, the Official Secrets Act, 1923.
3. Ms. Rashmi Shukla, wh
Chief Information Commissioner vs. State of Manipur
Central Public Information Commissioner vs High Court of Gujarat & Anr.
K. Anbazhagan v/s. Superintendent of Police and Ors.
M/s. Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v/s. State of Maharashtra
Sanapareday Maheedhar Seshagiri v. State of Andhra Pradesh
State of West Bengal Ors. v/s. Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights, West Bengal & Ors.
State of Bihar v. J.A.C.Saldanha
State of A.P. v. Golconda Linga Swamy
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.