Madras HC Quashes BSNL Employee’s Case Against Usage of Emoji

In the complaint, she stated that because of the posting of crying smiley faces, she was put through mental agony

In the complaint, the woman stated that because of the posting of crying smiley faces, she was put to mental agony and hence, that she could not sleep and was crying all night on the said day. 

(Photo: iStock/Altered by The Quint)

The Madras High Court recently quashed a criminal complaint against BSNL employees who posted a ‘laughing face with tears’ emoji in the official WhatsApp group.

A lady officer in BSNL had filed a complaint against other employees who used the emoji in response to a video she had posted in the official WhatsApp group.

The group was intended to share the complaints and unsatisfactory services of BSNL and to rectify them and improve the quality of service. The video featured three BSNL customers complaining about unsatisfactory services.

“When it is accepted that an emoji is sent to express one’s feeling about something, it cannot be treated as an overt act on others. It is a comment and may be intended to ridicule or to show one’s disapproval in a given context.” the Court said.

The complaint was registered under the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act.

In the complaint, she stated that the use of crying smiley faces put her through mental agony and hence, she could not sleep and cried all the night on the said day.

Before the High Court, the accused employees stated that the posting of crying smiley faces were to express their feelings in response to video footage and that it is not intended to harm the officer.

Justice SS Sundar observed that an emoji is sent to express one’s feeling about something, and it cannot be treated as an overt act on others and Section 67 of the IT Act will not attract as there is no obscenity in the emoji.

The court also observed that as the posting of emoji is to express one’s feeling, though it may offend the officer, it is not an act attracting Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act, 1998.

Further, it was observed that the complainant had no case that smiley was intended to humiliate her for being a member of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes.

Quashing the criminal cases against the accused, the judge observed that they ought not to have indulged in posting such emojis in the interest of BSNL since WhatsApp groups are formed to promote team spirit.

This Court wanted the petitioners to express their regret as the de-facto complainant in her individual perception felt offended by the posting of such crying smiley. Accordingly the first petitioner has filed an affidavit on behalf of all the petitioners, recording their regret for posting such smileys. The matter should rest here and it will be neither in the interest of justice to permit such complaints to stay,

Court’s Statement While Quashing Case

Read the full order here.

(This was first published on Live Law and has been republished with permission.)