The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioners' actions did not constitute forgery or cheating under the IPC, and the provisions of the Information Technology Act were not applicable to their case.

1. In the month of August every year, people from all over the world flock to Alleppey to witness the exhilarating Nehru Trophy Boat Race held at the Punnamda Lake. It is a fiercely competitive event and the tranquil lake front is transformed into a sea of humanity with an estimated two lakh people, including tourists from abroad, landing in the sleepy town to watch the event. For the people of neighbouring villages of Kuttanad, a victory at this race for their village boat is something they cherish for years. They take part with much vigour and cheer their men from the banks of the lake.

2. The State saw this as a business opportunity and started charging the visitors based on the comforts provided to them. Ticket charges range from Rs. 100/- to Rs. 3,000/-. Tickets can be purchased online by logging on to the website http://nehrutrophy.nic.in. The fortunate few who manage to get the tickets and are prepared to suffer all the discomforts can watch the great spectacle by sitting on the lawns, galleries or the pavilions erected for the purpose by the organizers, the Nehru Trophy Boat Race Society (“NTBRS” for the sake of brevity). As it occurs everywhere, the prime seats are taken by the high and mighty.

3. The petitioners are husband and wife. The 1st petitioner is an entrepreneur and is engaged in the home stay and houseboat business. He claims to have pioneered the concept of taking out tourists in his houseboat on the day of the race. The boat would be anchored in the vicinity to enable the tourists with deep pockets to watch the event. Other houseboat owners and employees followed suit and started extending the same facilities to their guests. It cannot be disputed that this novel way of garnering business provided a great employment opportunity for those associated with the houseboat and home stay business. The boats and other water vessels were anchored near the finishing point on the date of race so that the guests could watch the enthralling event from the comforts of the anchored boat. Some of the better equipped houseboats had decks, wherein the tourists could lounge and enjoy the event. When this unique manner of profiting from the event came to the notice of the NTBRS, the houseboat owners were called upon to pay a royalty for anchoring at Punnamada Lake. Annexure-D is the proceeding issued by the Sub Collector, Alappuzha in his capacity as the Secretary, NTBRS, which states that the rates for anchoring Motor boats, Houseboats and other water vessels at Punnamada Lake from the northern side of the Nehru Pavilion to Dock Chira would range from Rs. 10,000/- to Rs. 50,000/-. On the basis of the said proceeding, the 1st petitioner and other water vessel owners have been depositing the amount in the account of the Society as is evidenced by Annexure-B Bank Statement. This fact is also undisputed.

4. For the purpose of canvassing more business, the petitioner decided to go online and he registered a website in the name www.alleppeysnakeboatrace.com and invited tourists to the event. Through the website, the 1st petitioner promoted stay in the houseboats and also gave the added bonus of watching the boat race. The 1st petitioner does not dispute that several persons had purchased tickets from the website for watching the race.

5. While so, on 28.6.2018, a complaint was lodged by the Secretary, NTBRS, alleging that the two websites were engaged in the sale of tickets for the 68th Nehru Trophy Boat Race to be held in the year 2018. A crime was promptly registered under Sections 463, 465, 468 of the IPC and Section 71 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The 1st petitioner was arrested and he was remanded to judicial custody. The wife of the 1st petitioner was later arrayed as the 2nd accused.

6. Sri. Prasanth S. the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, would contend that the initiation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners is a clear abuse of process. The allegations made in the first information r