Right to be Forgotten: The Delhi High Court recognized the Right to be Forgotten, ordering global de-indexing of acquittal records.
In a landmark judgment delivered , the Delhi High Court officially recognized the Right to be Forgotten (RTBF) as an intrinsic component of the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Presided over by Justice Sachin Datta in the case of Laksh Vir Singh Yadav v. Union of India & Connected Matters, the court established a comprehensive framework allowing individuals to request the global de-indexing and masking of their personal information from digital platforms when it no longer serves a legitimate public interest.
The Core Mechanisms Ordered by the Court: To preserve the balance between an individual's digital dignity and the principle of open, public justice, the court implemented a twin-track remedy:
- Global De-Indexing: Search engine operators (such as Google and Microsoft) and online legal databases (such as Indian Kanoon) must disable name-based search functionality. This means typing an individual's name will no longer surface the problematic records.
- Information Masking: Publicly accessible digital versions of court orders replace names and identifying details (like addresses) with neutral placeholders like “ABC” or “XYZ”.
- Preservation of Records: The court did not order the complete deletion or takedown of legal records. The unredacted judgments remain fully preserved and searchable using case numbers, citations, or legal principles.
Who is Eligible for This Relief ?
The newly introduced framework targets individuals whose digital footprints permanently link them to past, resolved legal matters:
- Individuals who have been acquitted or discharged of criminal charges.
- Parties involved in cases where the FIR or proceedings were quashed or settled.
- Parties to purely private civil or matrimonial disputes.
- Individuals whose names appeared incidentally in judicial records without direct involvement.
Critical Exceptions to the Right:
The Delhi High Court explicitly ruled that the Right to be Forgotten is not absolute and cannot be used by public figures to selectively erase their past conduct. Relief will be denied in cases involving:
- Serious offenses committed against women or children.
- Breaches of public trust, such as corruption or offenses by public servants.
- Heinous crimes that threaten national security and sovereignty.
- Any matter where there is an overriding, legitimate public interest to know.
Why This Judgment Matters ?
In India, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 does not explicitly mandate a right to be forgotten for judicial functions. By deriving this mechanism directly from Article 21, the Delhi High Court has created a vital legal precedent for “digital rehabilitation”-ensuring that an acquittal in a physical courtroom is not rendered meaningless by a lifetime sentence of algorithmic amplification on the internet.
