Name of the Student: SHARATH N

Registration Number: 21DBLAW038

Programme: B.B.A., L.L.B., (HORNS)

Semester: IV

Course Name: INDIAN PENAL CODE

Course Code:5B

Date of Submission: 13 MAY 2023

Submitted to: NIRMALA HARISH

Through the introduction of new technology and inventions, our quality of life has significantly
increased. Technology advancements not only push the boundaries of science but also raise issues
with the legal system. Computers, the internet, and cyber space are all terms used to refer to
information technology as a whole. Internet and mobile phones are the two main information
technology tools used in the digital world. Today's economic and technological progress is based
on the development of IT. Every user can find all the necessary information on the internet
cosmos. Due to the numerous advancements made on the Internet, cybercrime has expanded and
now threatens the society greatly. Cyberstalking is one of the many cybercrimes. It occurs when
someone is stalked or harassed via the internet or other technological devices. Following a person's
online movements is known as cyber stalking, and it entails doing things like accessing chat rooms
they frequently use, posting threatening remarks on message boards they frequent, or sending the
victim an endless stream of emails. Since the late 1990s, a new category of crimes known as
"cyberstalking" has developed as a significant global criminological problem. Cyberstalking may be
broadly defined as the use of information and communication technologies to annoy one or more
victims4. Any action that upsets the victim, whether intentional or not, is considered harassment.
Since these technologies may be used to quickly threaten, cajole, coerce, harass, and abuse
unsuspecting users5, cyberstalking regularly locates its target online. Cyberstalking is similar to
traditional stalking in that it entails repeating behaviours that make a victim feel frightened and
uneasy. However, as new technologies develop, traditional stalking has assumed whole new forms
through various channels, including e-mail and the Web, or cyberspace. Cyberstalking
demonstrates the internet's ability to facilitate these types of crimes in a big way and leads to
approachable and potentially effective alternatives. A brand-new, deviant activity known as
cyberstalking uses technology to intimidate others. Due to our reliance on the Internet, e-mail,
instant messaging, chat rooms, and other communication technologies during the past ten years,
cyberstalking has emerged as a growing societal problem among computer users worldwide.
Online anonymity reduces the possibility of detection and encourages the usage of cyberstalking.
Although cyberstalking may appear to be relatively innocuous, the victims might suffer
psychological and emotional trauma. This can occasionally turn into actual stalking. In today's
digital culture, racism and other manifestations of intolerance and hatred increasingly use the
method of cyber stalking. Managing information technology is one of law's current concerns. These
issues affect practically all categories of law, not just one or two of the more traditional ones. The
present legal framework and system have shown itself to be inadequate when dealing with
information technology. It necessitates new definitions and a better comprehension of recognised
norms for criminal behaviour and punishment. Criminal behaviour that occurs in cyberspace may
be managed by the law, the effectiveness of the administrative framework can be increased, and
the accused can be tried quickly and efficiently. The judiciary has discussed these concerns on a
global scale. Thus, this essay will define the term "cyber stalking" and describe the many stalking
techniques used to annoy the victim. There will be a differentiation between online and offline
stalking in the next chapter. The next section of the article discusses the role of Indian legal
framework in reducing various forms of cybercrime, which have a major negative impact on
society and people's physical and mental health, and explores the problems associated with it. The
Indian constitutional basis for cyberstalking is also explained in the article .
DEFINING CYBER STALKING

The crime of "cyber stalking" is one in which the victim is being pursued by a stalker via the
internet or another electronic device. The terms "cyber stalking" and "online abuse" are
interchangeable. It entails repeatedly intimidating or threatening an individual. Following
someone to their home or place of work, destroying their property, leaving notes or objects behind,
or making obscene phone calls are all examples of stalking. Cyber stalkers always think they can
hide since they are anonymous. In other words, a cyber stalker's greatest asset is their ability to
monitor their victim's actions without revealing their identify by using the anonymity provided by
the internet. Therefore, effective cyber tools are required to investigate cybercrimes, be ready to
combat them, and prosecute victims. Digital communication technology has been used largely to
interpret the academic concept of cyber stalking as sexual harassment. Cyberstalking is described
as "a group of behaviours in which an individual, group of individuals, or organisation uses
information and communications technology to harass one or more individuals" by Bocij, Griffiths,
and McFarlane. The transmission of threats and false charges, theft of identities and data,
destruction of data or equipment, computer surveillance, enticement of children for sex, and
confrontation are a few examples of such actions. 7. In Baer's opinion, "Cyber stalking in particular
is composed of words alone and therefore stands more distinctly as apart as a crime of
accumulation"According to Ellison and Akdeniz, the phrase "cyber stalking" refers to online
harassment, which can take many different forms, such as sending spam emails, spreading
computer viruses, or pretending to be the victim9. It should be remembered that cyberstalking was
not officially regarded as a crime until the early 1990s. Through the Michigan Criminal Code,
cyberstalking became a crime in Michigan in 1993. In the UK, there is still no specific legal
definition of the word "cyber staking." Stalking and internet stalking are now governed by
provisions such as Ss.2-7 of the Protection from Harassment Act (PHA), 198710.

Before January 2013, there was no recognised concept of stalking or cyberstalking in Indian law.
In India, neither stalking nor cyberstalking had a recognised legal term prior to January 2013.
Before 2010, when Halder and Jaishankar provided a functional definition of cyber stalking that
reads, "In one word, when 'following' is added by mens rea to commit harm and it is successfully
carried out digitally, we can say cyber stalking has happened," the concept of cyber stalking had
not yet received any new academic understanding in India.

Section 354D of the Indian Penal Code, which was added by the Criminal Law Amendment Act,
2013, recognises stalking as a crime in India. The definition of stalking according to the provision
was as follows: "Any man who follows a woman or contacts or attempts to contact such woman to
foster personal interaction repeatedly despite a clear indication of disinterest by such woman or
whoever monitors the use of the internet, email, or any other form of electronic communication by
a woman or whoever watches or spies a person in a manner that results in fear of violence or
serious alarm or distress, in the mind of such woman or intervenes in the personal life of such The
text of the legislation places a lot of focus on the invasion of privacy that follows and stalks fear of
abuse, serious alarm, or distress. The aforementioned law has been plainly drafted as a "feminine-
centered statute." As a result, it offers a three-pronged explanation for stalking: (i) physically
enticing a woman despite her disinterest by engaging in behaviours that could disturb her peace of
mind or cause her to feel fear; (ii) keeping track of her digital whereabouts, communications, etc.
by engaging in digital behaviours that could seriously threaten, alarm, or disturb her mental peace;
and (iii) spying on or watching her with the intent to harm her. The Act also doesn't give 572
International Journal of Law Management & Humanities much attention. Legal professionals
frequently refer to harassing communications as stalking acts, according to the International
Journal of Law Management & Humanities, as contrast to the present cyber stalking regulations in
other countries, such the USA. Thus, it can be concluded from the criteria given above, which are
both scholarly and legal, that cyber stalking is a kind of online harassment that unavoidably may
violate the victim's privacy.

The legal definitions of cyberstalking that were mentioned above are derived from law that was
created with physical stalking in mind. Understanding the fundamental lingo utilised in this study,
namely, "cyber space," is required before delving farther into the subject. "Cyber space" refers to
the setting in which internet communications take place. In other words, it's a world that the
internet has built. Cyber space is described as "a global domain within the information
environment consisting of the interdependent network of information technology infrastructure,
including the Internet, telecommunications networks, computer systems, and embedded
processors and controllers". "The virtual space in which the electronic data of worldwide PCs
circulate" is another definition. This is a generalised description of the internet. Cyberspace's
primary characteristic is that it is made up of several computer networks, switches, routers,
servers, etc.16. It is a collection of numerous infrastructures, including those for public health,
banking, and the transportation and financial sectors.

DIFFERENT MANNERS OF CYBER STALKING

The three main methods of cyberstalking are as follows:

EMAIL STALKING

E-mail One of the most common forms of stalking in the virtual world is calling, sending mail, and
doing physical monitoring. Unsolicited email, such as hate, pornographic, or threatening
correspondence, is one of the most common types of harassment. Delivering massive quantities of
spam or viruses to a victim are only two examples of the numerous additional forms of
harassment. It is crucial to keep in mind that merely transmitting malware or telemarketing
pitches is not considered harassment. However, if such communications are consistently delivered
in a way that is aimed to intimidate, they may represent worrying habits that fall under the
umbrella of stalking.

INTERNET STALKING

In the case of cyber stalking, stalkers may fully utilise the cyber to disparage and put their victims
in danger. In these circumstances, the cyberstalking shifts from being private to being public. The
fact that this form of cyberstalking appears to bleed over into physical space the most is what is
most unsettling about it.
COMPUTER STALKING

The third technique is known as "cyber stalking," which gives the attacker access to the target's
device by using the Internet and the Windows operating system. The fact that a specific Windows-
based machine connected to the Internet may be detected and linked to another computer over the
Internet21 is probably not commonly known. This connection is a computer-to-computer one that
enables the intrusive party to take control of the target computer22 rather than the link that often
characterises Internet communications. Once the target device connects to the Internet in some
way, a cyber stalker frequently communicates with their target directly. The victim's computer may
be taken over by the stalker, leaving them with little recourse than to disconnect and change their
current Internet [Link] situation is comparable to discovering that a stalker is online and
in control of your phone whenever you pick it up. Disconnecting the connection entirely and then
reconnecting with a brand-new number is the only option to stop the stalker. Only one particular
incident of this tactic being employed in stalking involved a lady who got a message saying, "I'm
going to get you," after which the intrusive party unlocked her CD-Rom drive to demonstrate his
authority over her computer. Modernised versions of this technology assert that real-time
keystroke logging and real-time desktop viewing are both possible. It is not difficult to speculate
that these systems might look as very appealing means of monitoring and control for individuals
who engage in cyberstalking.

CYBER STALKING V. OFFLINE STALKING

Essentially, cyber stalking is an extension of traditional stalking in which the perpetrator employs
cutting-edge methods to carry out the crime. Cyberstalking is an increasing criminal problem in
modern society, thus it is important to look more closely at the offender's activities and attitudes.
However, at least from a criminological and legal standpoint, cyber stalking represents an
altogether new type of deviant, criminal activity. Cyberstalking activities have many characteristics
with traditional stalking practises. For starters, both traditional and internet thieves use tactics
and deeds designed deliberately to irritate and, in some circumstances, threaten or intimidate the
victim. As previously said, conventional stalkers and internet stalkers frequently retaliate violently
when a victim is approached, despised, disregarded, or denigrated. Many of the behaviour
displayed by cyber stalkers are similar to those of traditional stalkers, as has been highlighted
several times, yet there are many noteworthy characteristics that set the former apart from the
latter. The fact that both sorts of offenders are driven by an unquenchable need and need to have
power, control, and influence over the victim is one of their most apparent [Link] while
many, including many in law enforcement, consider cyber stalking to be relatively innocuous, if
these actions go unchecked, they might grow into a potentially dangerous physical altercation
between the culprit and the victim. Traditional stalking practises are generally predictable in that
the offender frequently follows the victim to their homes, places of employment, or even to school.
As a result, it is rather simple for investigators to locate, catch, and then arrest the offender. In
other cases, the stalker may make unpleasant phone calls intended to intimidate the victim, which
may be fairly readily traced back to the culprit. Many stalkers also leave unwelcome written notes
at the victim's home or place of business. As previously said, the aforementioned crimes typically
leave behind tangible evidence to build a criminal case against the perpetrator. The distinct high
possibility that both types of perpetrators had a prior, real or imagined, close relationship with the
victim is another distinguishing factor between the stalker and the cyber stalker; nevertheless, the
cyber stalker is more likely to randomly choose his or her victims. In conclusion, internet stalking
poses a harm to the victim and the stalker are unrelated, but offline stalking poses a direct bodily
threat to the victim and the victim and stalker may be acquainted. While real stalking is specific,
cyberstalking is pervasive. Additionally, the identity of the cyberstalker has never been made
explicit, but the identity of the offline stalker has been established. Offline stalking often involves a
direct psychological threat, but online stalking frequently involves the use of vulgar language and
verbal threats. In contrast to offline stalking, where it is easier to pursue the law, cyberstalking
occasionally necessitates extradition. Based on the aforementioned distinctions, a number of
criminologists have suggested that the best way to combat cyberstalking is to develop a new system
for protecting cyberstalkers rather than relying on laws to determine guilt and eventually impose
punishment for physical stalking. The actus reus and mens rea components of crime should be
covered by this new system. This new approach must deal with resolving the challenges of criminal
identification, evidence collecting, and jurisdictional concerns.

INDIAN LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK AND THE DRAWBACKS

The laws of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Indian Penal Code, 1860 with regard to
cyber stalking have been the major subject of this chapter. The Indian Penal Code exclusively
provides protection against stalking for women, which makes the legislation against stalking
biassed towards women. However, this chapter attempts to clarify a few parts of the Indian Penal
Code and the Information Technology Act that are somehow related to this crime, and an
explanation of the relationship between the laws and the crime has been provided. The following
are some of the Indian Penal Code's sections regarding cyberstalking:

First, "stalking" is defined under Section 354D of the IPC. (1) Any man who follows a woman and
repeatedly contacts, or tries to contact, her to foster personal interaction despite a clear indication
of disinterest on her part; or ii. monitors her use of the internet, email, or any other form of
electronic communication is guilty of stalking. With the caveat that such behaviour won't qualify as
stalking if the perpetrator can show that: i. It was pursued to prevent or detect crime, and the man
accused of stalking had been charged with that duty by the State; ii. It was pursued to comply with
any condition or requirement imposed by anyone under any law; or iii. In the specific
circumstances, such behaviour was reasonable. (2) The first conviction for stalking will result in a
term of imprisonment of either description that may last up to three years, as well as a fine, and
the second or subsequent convictions will result in a term of imprisonment of either description
that may last up to five years, as well as a fine Following the Delhi gang rape case, the
aforementioned clause was introduced to the Criminal Amendment Act of 2013 in order to
advance women in society and safeguard them from all types of sexual harassment. The
aforementioned section considers both traditional stalking and online stalking. The actions that
constitute the crime of "stalking" have an explanation. It is made very clear that any attempt to
keep tabs on a woman's online activity constitutes stalking. As a result, the stalker will be charged
with an offence under Section 354D of the Indian Penal Code if he engages in any of the
behaviours listed in the section. This section has several flaws, including the fact that it exclusively
acknowledges "women" as victims while ignoring the possibility of victims among men. According
to the Section, anybody who attempts to watch how a woman uses the internet, email, or any other
kind of electronic communication is guilty of the crime of cyber stalking. We can see that it solely
gives attention to ladies. It is therefore discriminatory against women.

Second, the lawmakers have not spoken about the "method of monitoring." It is possible for
someone to behave without meaning to stalk someone, yet their actions nonetheless qualify as
such38. Second, "obscenity" is defined under Section 292 of the IPC. The act of sending vulgar or
offensive content to a victim by email, text message, social networking site, or other means falls
under the definition of cyberstalking. When a stalker sends obscene material online with the goal
that the recipient would read, see, or hear the content of the message, he is in violation of Section
292 of the Indian Penal Code and is guilty of stalking.

Third, the IPC's Section 507 addresses "criminal intimidation by anonymous communication."
According to this provision, it becomes an offence when a stalker makes an effort to conceal his
identity so that the victim is uninformed of the source of the threat. Thus, it provides anonymity,
which is a key component of cyberstalking. If the stalker makes an effort to hide their identity, they
will be found guilty under this provision. Fourth, the IPC's Section 509 addressing women's
modesty states: "Word, gesture, or act designed to offend the modesty of a woman.—Anyone who
violates a woman's privacy or insults her modesty by saying anything, making a gesture, or
displaying something with the intention that the lady will hear it, see the gesture, or know the
object is there will be penalised.40 Under this clause, a stalker may be held accountable if their
actions interfere with the woman's right to privacy by making a gesture or by using words that are
transmitted through emails, texts, or social media posts. He would be charged with an offence
under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code if he engages in any such acts. One of Section 509's
flaws is that it is a gender-biased provision that concentrates primarily on a woman's modesty and
ignores the reality that cyberstalking is a crime that may affect both men and women and is
gender-neutral in nature. It is a requirement of this section that the gesture, sound, or words be
said, heard, or seen, accordingly. Therefore, since words cannot be uttered, gestures cannot be
seen, and sounds cannot be heard online, cyber stalkers can easily avoid the punishment under
this provision.41 Last but not least, discussions through the internet cannot be used to infer a
motive for compromising the woman's modesty.

The Information Technology Act of 2000 contains the following provisions about cyberstalking:
First off, Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code is mirrored in Section 67 of the Information
Technology Act, 2000. The publication of pornographic content in "electronic form" is the topic of
this section. As a result, this section addresses internet stalking. If the stalker attempts to post any
pornographic content about the victim on social media, or in electronic form, in an effort to bully
the victim, he will be in violation of Section 67 of the IT Act. Second, a portion of the offence of
cyberstalking is covered by Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. As a result of the
2008 modification, this provision was added. It stipulates that a stalker will be found guilty of an
offence under Section 67A of the IT Act and will be punished accordingly if he seeks to disseminate
any "sexually explicit" material in electronic form, such as through emails, texts, or on social
media. Thirdly, the Information Technology Act of 2000 contains a newly added section, Section
67B. The Amendment Act of 2008 has just added this provision. Fourth, Section 66E of the
Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code deal with
"voyeurism."
The section focuses on when a stalker targets children under the age of 18 and publishes material
in which children are engaged in sexual activities in order to terrorise the children. "Whoever,
intentionally or knowingly captures, publishes or transmits the image of a private area of any
person without his or her consent, under circumstances violating that person's privacy, shall be
punished," states Section [Link], Section 354C states that "Any man who watches, or captures
the image of a woman engaged in a private act in circumstances where she would normally have
the expectation of not being observed either by the perpetrator or by any other person at the
perpetrator's behest, or disseminates such image shall be punished."The stalker could gain access
to the victim's account and post private images on social networking sites in order to make the
victim feel depressed and afraid. Both of the aforementioned clauses attempt to make it illegal to
broadcast or take images of someone else's intimate acts without that person's permission44. The
victim is addressed as "any person" in Section 66E, however Section 345C is somewhat biassed
towards women. The victim must be a "woman" in accordance with section 354C. What is striking
in this situation is that the penalties under the IT Act are substantially harsher even though all
offline rules apply to digital media. It is important to note that the IT Act places a strong focus on
women's bodies and sexualities, even if Section 66A of the Act deals with a broad category of
"offensive messages." The act of voyeurism is covered by Indian Penal Code Section 354C. Because
the victim must be a "woman" to be attracted to this part, its scope is quite limited. However,
unlike Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code, Section 66E of the Information Technology Act has
a broader definition of voyeurism. The victim is referred to as "any person" in Section 66E.

Therefore, the victim does not have to be a "woman" to get justice under this clause. The
Information Technology Act of 2000's Section 66E may be used by the victim if he is a guy. Under
the Information Technology Act of 2000 and the Indian Penal Code of 1860, there is no express
provision regarding cyberstalking and the defamatory or threatening messages sent by the stalker
while stalking the victim through messages, phone calls, e-mails, or by publishing blogs under the
name of the victim. The culprit may be punished as described above in line with the requirements
of the aforementioned Acts, but no specific provision is made for handling this offence alone.
Although it takes relatively little time to commit this crime, its effects last for a very long time. This
can have a significant negative impact on both mental and physical health. The victim's protection
must be taken into consideration while increasing the sentence under the current laws.

THE PROBLEM OF ENFORCEMENT IN THE CONTEXT OF INDIAN

The main issue of territorial jurisdiction has not been adequately addressed in the Information
Technology Act of 2000 or the Information Technology Amendment Act of 2008. portions 46, 48,
57, and 61, where the manner of adjudication and the appeal procedure are specified, are the many
portions in which the issue of jurisdiction has been raised. The authority of police officers to enter
and conduct searches in a public area in connection with a cybercrime, etc., is described in
provision 80, which is another provision. Cybercrimes are crimes carried out via computers, and it
can be challenging to decide whether P.S. will have jurisdiction over an offence if someone hacks
into the email account of someone located in another state or nation. Due to the jurisdiction issue
in these circumstances, many police officers prefer to cease admitting the victim's claims. The
issue of jurisdiction needs to be clarified as to what all the pertinent criteria are to be observed in
these circumstances50 because cybercrimes are not constrained by territorial boundaries. Which
State has the power to handle cases of cybercrime has to be well explained. The extradition
agreement between the two nations concerned may be the answer to the issue. In cases when such
an agreement exists between the two interested countries51, extradition is an arrangement where
the defendant is repatriated to the nation where he has committed the crime. In the same way, if
there is an agreement between the countries where the victim and the stalker both reside, there
won't be any enforcement issues in the instance of cyber stalking52. When one country's law is in
conflict with another country's law, jurisdictional concerns result. A stalker may be punished in
one nation while not being considered criminal in another. When this occurs, the issue of
enforcement emerges, and international extradition and cooperation agreements are put to use.
The "extraterritorial jurisdiction" in India is provided for under Section 75 of the Information
Technology Act. This clause makes it clear that regardless of whether an infraction is committed
within or outside of India, the offender must abide by the Information Technology Act's rules
regardless of whether he is an Indian citizen or not. assuming that such an offence involves a
network or computer system located in India. Indian law only partially addresses the issue of
enforcement, as a result. The stalker's anonymous identity is one of the characteristics of
cyberstalking. There have been calls to reduce identification's anonymity. Though practically every
nation's laws protect freedom of speech, limiting anonymous identification would violate this
right, therefore this looked to be a contentious topic. In the instances of Sahara India Real Estate
Corp. Ltd. v. Securities & Exchange Board of India54 and In Re RamlilaMaidan Incident v. Home
Secretary53, the court determined that the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by
Article 19(1)(a) is not an unalienable right. as 2013, society has been evolving, and as laws are
dynamic in nature, they should be altered periodically to support societal goals like preserving
public safety and maintaining law and order. Although it is acknowledged that the 2013 Criminal
Amendment was introduced to protect women from sexual exploitation, the time has changed, and
women are increasingly making false accusations against males utilising these rules that are in
their benefit. Men are also victims of stalking, and the number of these incidents is rising quickly.
The Indian Penal Code's prominent stalking law, Section 354D, is inherently biassed against
women. This issue needs to be fixed in order for the concept of equality enshrined in Article 14 of
the Indian Constitution to be reflected in the said IPC provision and for the goal of treating
everyone equally to be realised. Therefore, it is not necessary to use the words "man" and "woman"
directly. The phrase "anyone" or "any person" should be used in the section's rewording to avoid
violating Article 14. Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code discusses the subject of a woman's
modesty. Also, "woman" should be replaced with "any person" in this section. By sending vulgar
items over the internet, email, or text message, a female stalker might also insult a man's modesty.
Therefore, it is imperative that legislators try to safeguard both men and women, not only women,
from the negative impacts of cyberstalking. The Indian Penal Code's Section 354C addresses
voyeurism, which is a kind of cyber stalking as the offender/stalker may access the victim's
computer to see his or her private photos without permission. The same has to be done about this
section's gender prejudice.

CONCLUSION

The phrase "cyber stalking" is very recent. Due to the serious severity of the offense—which affects
the victim's bodily and mental health—this has been classified as a crime. The judiciary and
legislature have both focused on this issue, and it is now clear that strong laws and enforcement
organisations are needed to handle situations like this. There have been claims made that although
cyber stalking is a new crime, it is really an expanded form of stalking. The stalker's primary goal
in committing the aforementioned crime is to both annoy and threaten the victim. This means that
it is a criminal action. Even many nations have particular laws governing the aforementioned
matter. Due to the enforcement issues mentioned in this article, India lacks such specialised law,
and the present measures dealing with such offences directly or indirectly are ineffective in
lowering their frequency. There are very few incidents that have been documented since the police
don't take the case because of problems with enforcement since the stalker and the victim may be
from different countries. Thus, deciding which country's legislation should be applied becomes
challenging. Therefore, the legislature should take into account the aforementioned complications
in the existing laws and create an effective legislative framework to deal with this significant type
of violations. Here are a few of the reforms that are suggested:
The phrase "cyber stalking" is very recent. Due to the serious severity of the offense—which affects
the victim's bodily and mental health—this has been classified as a crime. The judiciary and
legislature have both focused on this issue, and it is now clear that strong laws and enforcement
organisations are needed to handle situations like this. There have been claims made that although
cyber stalking is a new crime, it is really an expanded form of stalking. The stalker's primary goal
in committing the aforementioned crime is to both annoy and threaten the victim. This means that
it is a criminal action. Even many nations have particular laws governing the aforementioned
matter. Due to the enforcement issues mentioned in this article, India lacks such specialised law,
and the present measures dealing with such offences directly or indirectly are ineffective in
lowering their frequency. There are very few incidents that have been documented since the police
don't take the case because of problems with enforcement since the stalker and the victim may be
from different countries. Thus, deciding which country's legislation should be applied becomes
challenging. Therefore, the legislature should take into account the aforementioned complications
in the existing laws and create an effective legislative framework to deal with this significant type
of violations. Here are a few of the reforms that are suggested: texts with pornographic and rude
language. Internet service providers exercise control by placing erroneous emails in the spam
folder. When it comes to finding the stalker, coordination between Internet service providers and
law police is essential for successfully combating these cybercrimes. Thus, if the aforementioned
actions are combined with other effective measures, the results will become apparent over time
and will contribute to the quicker eradication of this category of cybercrime. Effective legislative
measures are urgently needed, and they must be effectively put into effect.