New Delhi: While answering the question of the city court, Delhi police on Saturday stated that he had decided to add part 66B of the IT law in various cellular theft cases.
On July 22, Metropolitan Magistrate Deepak Kumar has asked the police to submit a report on the question why part 66B of the IT Law has not been called in cases such as cellular theft.
Section 66B of Te AWCT Dalaman by receiving computer resources against or communication devices.
“Before parting together with this order and given the submission carried out by the Non-Prayer Prosecutor Section 66B from IS acting in this type of case, let a report called from Sho, PS Oia about why this 66B part acts has not been called in this case and / or not called in the case of case of mobile theft case, “said the court.
His observations came while providing someone who was accused of cellular theft asking him to complement the personal bond in the amount of Rs 15,000 with one guarantee of number such as subject to the condition that he would not indulge in the same violation or influence the witness and had to join the investigation to appear in court And when directed to do it.
Arun Singh’s public prosecutor submitted that there were too many cellular theft cases and at the time of recovery of this cellphone, mostly found locked and inaccessible.
Therefore, it cannot be ascertained whether the restored device falls under the category of functioning computer resource communication devices.
Therefore, the 66B part acts is not called, the prosecutor said.