CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >   The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL... Start Learning for Free
The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.
The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?
Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.
Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.
Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.
Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?
  • a)
    It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.
  • b)
    It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.
  • c)
    It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.
  • d)
    It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that...
Cybercrime investigation agencies will be amenable to the proposition that the platforms are bound by the Indian laws and falls within the Indian jurisdiction.
All other options cannot be inferred from the passage.
Attention CLAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CLAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CLAT.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Directions: Read the passage carefully and answer the questions given beside.It has been repeatedly held that the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) is a sui generis legislation, enacted to tackle money laundering through white-collar crimes. According to Section 3 of the PMLA, the act of projecting or claiming proceeds of crime to be untainted property constitutes the offense of money laundering. Under the Schedule to the PMLA, a number of offenses under the Indian Penal Code and other special statutes have been included, which serve as the basis for the offense of money laundering. In other words, the existence of predicate offense is sine qua non to charge someone with money laundering. It is crucial to note that the investigation and prosecution of the predicate offense are done typically by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) or the State Police.Section 50 of the PMLA provides powers of a civil court to the ED authorities for summoning persons suspected of money laundering and recording statements. However, the Supreme Court held that ED authorities are not police officers. It observed in Vijay Madanlal Choudhary v. Union of India (2022) that “the process envisaged by Section 50 of the PMLA is in the nature of an inquiry against the proceeds of crime and is not ‘investigation’ in strict sense of the term for initiating prosecution.” There are other dissimilarities between ED authorities and the police. While the police are required to register a First Information Report (FIR) for a cognizable offense before conducting an investigation, ED authorities begin with search procedures and undertake their investigation for the purpose of gathering materials and tracing the ‘proceeds of crime’ by issuing summons. Any statement made by an accused to the police is inadmissible as evidence in court, whereas a statement made to an ED authority is admissible. A copy of the FIR is accessible to the accused, whereas the Enforcement Case Information Report is seldom available.While the police investigating the predicate offense are empowered to arrest and seek custody of the accused, the ED is meant to focus on recovering the proceeds of crime in order to redistribute the same to victims. It is not clear whether the ED has managed to do this. Per contra, the Proceeds of Crime Act, 2002, the analogous legislation in the U.K., almost entirely concentrates on the confiscation of assets through dedicated civil proceedings. Unfortunately, of late, much of the ED’s powers have been discharged in effecting pretrial arrests, which used to be the prerogative of the police investigating the predicate offence. In the past, the CBI was used to impart fear among political opponents. In the process, the agency received the condemnation of various courts and earned the nickname “caged parrot”. Whether the ED will go down the same path or reorient its approach will entirely depend on the intervention of the country’s constitutional courts.Q.Which of the following is not the appropriate cause-and-effect relationship in the passages context?

Top Courses for CLAT

The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The Madras High Court has been hearing a PIL petition since 2018 that initially asked the court to declare the linking of Aadhaar with a government identity proof as mandatory for registering email and social media accounts. The petitioners, victims of online bullying, went to the court because they found that law enforcement agencies were inefficient at investigating cybercrimes, especially when it came to gathering information about pseudonymous accounts on major online platforms. This case brings out some of the most odious trends in policymaking in India.The first issue is how the courts have continually expanded the scope of issues considered in PILs. In this case, it is absolutely clear that the court is not pondering about any question of law. In what could be considered as abrogation of the separation of powers provision in the Constitution, the Madras High Court started to deliberate on a policy question with a wide ranging impact: Should Aadhaar be linked with social media accounts?Second, not only are governments failing to assert their own powers of regulation in response to the courts' actions, they are on the contrary encouraging such PILs.Third, 'Aadhaar linking' is becoming increasingly a refrain whenever any matter even loosely related to identification or investigation of crime is brought up. While the Madras High Court has ruled out such linking for social media platforms, other High Courts are still hearing petitions to formulate such rules. The processes that law enforcement agencies use to get information from platforms based in foreign jurisdictions rely on international agreements.Linking Aadhaar with social media accounts will have no bearing on these processes. Hence, the proposed 'solution' misses the problem entirely, and comes with its own threats of infringing privacy.Q. Suppose the Madras High Court passed a judgement to link Aadhar card to social media accounts. In such a case, based on the author's reasoning, what is the likely impact it will have on Cybercrime investigating agencies?a)It will be useful provided the social media platform is bound by Indian jurisdiction.b)It will be useful if the social media platform is based in foreign jurisdiction.c)It will be useful only if the process of collecting information is less cumbersome.d)It will be useful if the social media account is held by an Indian national.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev