All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Directions: Read the following passage and an... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.
Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?
On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they don't allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.
Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]
Q. What is the reason behind the author's assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?
  • a)
    It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.
  • b)
    It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.
  • c)
    It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime. 
  • d)
    It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recentl...
Option 1 is not right as nowhere does the author say that internet can be accessed by anyone in the world. Option 2 is not right as although the author does suggest that cyber territory and geographical territory are different, yet this option is not the best option. Options 4 can be struck right out as nothing of this sort is suggested by the author. Thus, option 3 is right as it shows what exactly the author is suggesting by the saying internet has no territorial limit.
Free Test
FREE
Start Free Test
Start Free Test
Community Answer
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recentl...
Explanation:

Geographical vs. Cyber Territorial Boundaries:
- The passage highlights the difference between geographical territories and cyber territories.
- While countries have defined borders, the internet has no such demarcated boundaries.

Global Accessibility of the Internet:
- The absence of territorial boundaries implies that the internet is accessible globally.
- Users from any part of the world can access the internet, making it a borderless entity.

Irrelevance of Geographical Territories in Cybercrime:
- The assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries supports the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.
- Cybercrimes can be committed across borders, posing jurisdictional challenges for law enforcement agencies.

Foundation for the Argument:
- The statement serves as the foundation for discussing jurisdictional issues in investigating cybercrimes.
- It sets the stage for exploring how the global nature of the internet complicates criminal investigations involving cross-border offenses.
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.
< Previous Question Next Question >
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 CLATView all

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. 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 Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the following passage and answer the question.Recently, India was placed second (next to China) in terms of the number of internet users. However, unlike the geographical limits of countries, the internet is limitless, with no demarcated territory. This gives rise to various kinds of jurisdictional issues with respect to the criminal investigation. One such issue arises when the perpetrator is sitting in some other country, and the crime is committed within the territory of India (e.g. A person sitting in Latin America commits OTP fraud via internet in the territory of India). Now, upon receipt of the complaint, the police need to gather evidence to prove the offense so that the perpetrator could be brought to justice. But what happens when the data is stored at a remote server outside the territory of India? Is the investigating agency powerful enough to access such information in order to gather evidence against the perpetrator?On one hand, the power of police in India is limited to the territory of India, as per Section 1(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the other hand the internet has no territorial limitation. The internet is available worldwide having servers everywhere in the world. Even though, the Information Technology Act provides extraterritorial applicability for cybercrimes, but problem arises when such application is in conflict with privacy laws of other countries. Now, when a cybercrime is committed by someone residing outside India, the investigation of police is faced by a lot of obstruction, if the data of the perpetrator or of the victim is stored on a server in a country with strong privacy laws. Take, for example, a person (outside India) who uses Facebook to push someone (in India) into suicide, ultimately committing abatement of suicide (penal offense under the Indian Penal Code). The police will ask Facebook to provide access to the personal data of the victim. Since the personal data is stored in the cloud, the location of the server might be in such a country where the privacy laws are so strong that they dont allow any discloser of information. Ultimately, the police will be stuck with no evidence in hand while the perpetrator remains scot-free.Now, a way to remove such an obstruction is to store the data of Indian citizens within the territory of India so that such crimes can be investigated properly.[Extracted, with edits and revisions from Data localisation: a way to catch the perpetrators?, Science and law blog by GNLU Society]Q.What is the reason behind the authors assertion that the internet lacks territorial boundaries?a)It indicates the global accessibility of the internet to anyone.b)It distinguishes between geographical and cyber territorial boundaries.c)It forms the foundation for the argument that geographical territories become irrelevant in the context of cybercrime.d)It implies that the realm of the internet is beyond human comprehension.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

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
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Follow Us
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup