Circulating video on WhatsApp falls under SC/ST Act: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court has held that circulating videos or photographs of a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe on WhatsApp constitutes an act done in “public view” and, therefore, attracts provisions of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Justice Yanshivraj Khobragade delivered the ruling while dismissing a bail application filed by the accused, Nikhil Thepale.
The Case and Allegations
According to the case records, the complainant belongs to an SC/ST community. The prosecution alleged that Thepale had demanded favours from the victim. When she refused, he allegedly recorded videos and took photographs of her and circulated them via WhatsApp to her husband, sister-in-law, and other relatives.
An FIR in the matter was registered on November 5, 2025. The court noted that Thepale has remained absconding since the date of registration of the crime.
Court’s Observations
Justice Khobragade observed that, on the material placed before the court, an offence under Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act was made out at this stage. Importantly, the court underscored that the act of circulating videos and photographs of the victim on WhatsApp “also fell within ‘public view’.”
On the question of bail, the court took note of the accused’s continued abscondence. “The appellant has remained absconding since the date of registration of the crime. Therefore, to my mind, the appellant is not entitled to bail,” Justice Khobragade said, dismissing the plea.
Charges and Legal Provisions
Thepale faces charges under Sections 77 and 78 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The case also invokes provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000—specifically Sections 66E and 67—as well as Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(w)(ii) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. In its assessment, the court recorded the sufficiency of material for offences under Sections 3(1)(w)(ii) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act at this stage.
Representation
Advocate Mahesh Rai appeared for the appellant. Public Prosecutor G. S. Umale represented the State, and advocate Sanket Joshi appeared on behalf of the victim.
Outcome and Significance
With the bail application dismissed, Thepale remains without relief as he continues to be absconding. The ruling clarifies that sharing content over private messaging platforms such as WhatsApp can meet the “public view” threshold under the SC/ST Act, depending on the circumstances of circulation—an interpretation that bears significance for the application of the law to digital communications.
