Later, the Karnataka government moved a recall application before the bench.
The State pointed out that the Court had quashed all proceedings only on the basis of sub Section (a) of Section 67B of the IT Act that prohibits transmitting, publishing in electronic form, any material that depicts children engaged in sexually explicit act or conduct.
However, sub Section (b) of Section 67B of the Act says that the act of creating text or digital images, collecting, seeking and also browsing and downloading material depicting children in obscene or indecent or sexually explicit manner, is also an offence.
The Court agreed that it had overlooked sub-section ‘b’.
“The sub-clause b of Section 67B is what becomes applicable to the case at hand. Since the proceedings were annulled without permitting further investigations and noticing section 67B (b) it would undoubtedly become a reason for recall of the order passed quashing the proceeding in favour of the petitioner,” Justice Nagaprasanna said.
The Court also rejected the argument of the petitioner’s counsel that once an order was passed, it was not open for the court to recall it or review.
“The said submission is unacceptable as Section 482 of CrPC cannot be controlled by Section 362 of CrPC. As inherent powers cannot be controlled by other provisions,” the High Court said.
Source: Barandbench
