Disposed¶25

Ruzbeh Dossabhoy Raja v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Feb 2025PIL/23/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court; PIL No. 23 of 2025; decided 12.02.2025; cyber-attacks; cyber security; Maharashtra Government websites; Maharashtra Cyber; Cyber Crime, Mumbai Police; preventive measures; FIR; Information Technology Act, 2000; disposal with liberty to submit suggestions; implementation subject to feasibility; no opinion on merits; petitioner: Ruzbeh Dossabhoy Raja; coram: Alok Aradhe, CJ. and Bharati Dangre, J.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to submit proposal/suggestions to respondent nos. 4 and 6, with respondent nos. 4 and 6 to take effective steps to implement the same subject to feasibility; no opinion expressed on merits. ¶25

Ruzbeh Dossabhoy Raja vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether directions should be issued to the respondents to conduct a detailed study of, and report on, cyber-attacks on various Maharashtra Government websites, to take preventive measures against further attacks, and to register an FIR against those responsible.

¶15

Court's answer

The PIL is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to submit proposal/suggestions to respondent nos. 4 and 6 (Maharashtra Cyber / Cyber Police authorities).

¶25

Ratio / Principle

On receipt of the petitioner's proposal/suggestions, respondent nos. 4 and 6 shall take effective steps to implement the same, subject to feasibility of the proposal/suggestions.

¶25

Key takeaways

This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.ratio¶26
Observation that there is a need to prevent government websites from cyber-attacks, given the petitioner (claiming expertise) is willing to give suggestions to the competent authority.obiter¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Public Interest Litigation (PIL No. 23 of 2025, Bombay High Court, Coram: Alok Aradhe, CJ. and Bharati Dangre, J.; decided 12 February 2025) filed by an LL.M. (IT & IPR) holder and Visiting Professor of Law seeking directions to the State of Maharashtra and others to study and report cyber-attacks on Maharashtra Government websites, take preventive measures, and register an FIR. The Additional Government Pleader stated on instructions that if the petitioner submitted proposals/suggestions to the competent authority, respondent nos. 4 and 6 (Maharashtra Cyber / Cyber Police) would take steps for their implementation subject to feasibility. The Court disposed of the PIL granting the petitioner liberty to submit such proposal/suggestions to respondent nos. 4 and 6, directed that effective steps be taken to implement them subject to feasibility, and expressly clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

¶1

9-PIL-23-2025

¶2

Pdp

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 23 OF 2025

¶5

Digitally signed by PRAVIN PRAVIN DASHARATH DASHARATH PANDIT PANDIT Date: 2025.02.12 18:14:58 +0530

¶6

Ruzbeh Dossabhoy Raja .. Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

¶9

Mr. Ajinkya Udane a/w Jay Bhatia a/w Kajal Maurya for petitioner.

¶10

Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Addl. Govt. Pleader with Mrs. Savita A. Prabhune, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 6.

¶11

Mrs. Shehnaz V. Bharucha and Mr. Ashutosh Mishra i/by A. A. Ansari for respondent nos.7 and 10.

¶12

CORAM: ALOK ARADHE, CJ. & BHARATI DANGRE, J.

¶13

DATE: 12^th FEBRUARY, 2025

¶14

P.C.:

¶15

1. The petitioner has filed this Public Interest Litigation seeking direction to the respondents to conduct a detailed study and submit a report as to the type and magnitude of the cyber-attacks on various Maharashtra Government Websites. The petitioner also seeks direction to take preventive measures to ensure that no further cyber-attacks take place and to register First Information Report against the person responsible for such attacks.

¶16

2. We have perused the pleadings made by the petitioner.

¶17

¶18

9-PIL-23-2025

¶19

3. The petitioner claims to be a public spirited individual and holds a Masters Degree in Law (LL.M.) specializing in Information Technology and Intellectual Property Rights Law (IT & IPR) and hence is conversant with the Information Technology Act, 2000 and subject matter of this petition. The petitioner also claims to be Visiting Professor of Law at the University of Mumbai and also an Information Technology Consultant and claims to be well-versed with Internet Technologies, Web Hosting Solutions, Malware Attacks and Domain Name Infrastructure which are all the subject matter of this PIL.

¶20

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to give suggestions to respondent nos.4 and 6, i.e., Maharashtra Cyber, Office of Spl. Inspector General of Police-Cyber and Deputy Commissioner of Police, Cyber Crime (Mumbai Police) to ensure that the cyber-attacks do not take place on government websites. The petitioner is also ready and willing to suggest the preventive measures to ensure that cyber-attacks do not take place on government websites.

¶21

5. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that in case the petitioner submits the proposal/suggestions to the competent authority, the respondent nos. 4 and 6 shall take steps to ensure its implementation subject to its feasibility.

¶22

6. Undoubtedly, there is need to prevent the government websites from the cyber-attacks. The petitioner, who claims to be an expert is willing to give suggestions to the competent authority to prevent such cyber-attacks.

¶23

¶24

9-PIL-23-2025

¶25

7. In view of the aforesaid, the PIL is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioner to submit proposal/suggestions to respondent nos.4 and 6. Needless to state that on receipt of such proposal/suggestions made by the petitioner, respondent nos.4 and 6 shall take effective steps to implement the same subject to feasibility of the proposal/suggestions.

¶26

8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter.

¶27

(BHARATI DANGRE, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶28

Ruzbeh Dossabhoy Raja v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ruzbeh Dossabhoy Raja v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Janahakka Sanrakshan Andolan through S.B. Gangurde and R.H. Sonawane and S.R. Gajghat vs State of Maharashtra

Anuj Krishnakumar Mittal vs State of Maharashtra

Akaram Santram Patil vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Ministry of Rural Dept. and Ors.

Rahul Sambhaji Tupe vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Adv. Chetan Hemant Bhoir vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Prin. Sec. Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Sachin Ranganath Bhagat vs Pune Municipal Corporation Thr Deputy Engineer and Ors.

Karmyogi Swargiya Dr Shivajirao Patil Nilangekar Taluka Eksangh Kruti Samiti Nilanga through vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Umesh Shankarrao Bhole and Others vs State of Maha., Thr.Secretary, Dept. of Agriculture, Animal Husb., Dairy and Fisheries and Ors.

General Manager, Western Railway vs N. P. Enterprise

Aditya Birla Finance Limited vs Madansinh Gunwantsinh Punvar

Aditya Birla Finance Limited vs Vivek Krishna

Dev Engineers through Its Partner Raghuvir Purohit vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary Department of Forest Cultural Affairs and Fisheries

Mahendra Realtors and Infrastructure Limited vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary Department of Forest Cultural Affairs and Fisheries

Ms Sadbhav Engineering Ltd. vs Maharshtra State Road Development Corporation