Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Aneesh K. Thankachan vs Union Of India on 13 September, 2023

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

WP(C) No.36896/2022                         1/2

                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                         PRESENT
                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
           Wednesday, the 13th day of September 2023 / 22nd Bhadra, 1945
                            WP(C) NO. 36896 OF 2022(J)
   PETITIONER:

          ANEESH K. THANKACHAN, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O C. THANKACHAN, KOTTEKKATTU
          PANDINJATTETHIL VEEDU, VALAKAM P.O., KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM-691532.

   RESPONDENTS:

      1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF
         ELECTRONICS & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
         ELECTRONICS NIKETAN, 6 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OFFICES COMPLEX, NEW DELHI
         - 110003.
      2. GROUP CO-ORDINATOR (CYBER LAW), DESIGNATED OFFICER UNDER THE E
         INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (PROCEDURE AND SAFEGUARDS FOR BLOCKING FOR
         ACCESS OF INFORMATION BY PUBLIC) RULES, 2009, MINISTRY OF
         ELECTRONICS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,
         ELECTRONICS NIKETAN, 6 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OFFICES COMPLEX, NEW DELHI
         - 110003.
      3. R DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION AND TECHNOLOGY, MINISTRY OF ELECTRONICS
         AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, ELECTRONICS
         NIKETAN, 6 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OFFICES COMPLEX, NEW DELHI - 110003.
      4. REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
         DEPARTMENT, GOVT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA-
         695 001.
      5. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT, THE NODAL OFFICER (UNDER RULE 4
         OF THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (PROCEDURE AND SAFEGUARDS FOR BLOCKING
         FOR ACCESS OF INFORMATION BY PUBLIC) RULES, 2009), GOVT OF KERALA,
         SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA -695 001
      6. YOUTUBE THROUGH GOOGLE INDIA PVT.LTD, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED
         REPRESENTATIVE, HAVING OFFICE AT UNITECH SIGNATURE TOWER-II, TOWER
         B, SECTOR-15, VILLAGE SILOKHERA, GURGAON, HARYANA - 122 001
         EMAIL:[email protected] .*(CORRECTED) *ADDRESS OF R6 CORRECTED
         AS: GOOGLE LLC, 1600, AMPHITHEATRE PARKWAY, MOUNTAIN VIEW,
         CALIFORNIA-94043, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. (ADDRESS OF R6 CORRECTED
         VIDE ORDER DATED 17-01-2023 IN IA NO.1/2023).
      7. GOOGLE LLC GOOGLE LLC - INDIA LIAISON OFFICE, UNIT NO. 26, THE
         EXECUTIVE CENTER, LEVEL 8, DLFCENTRE, SANSAD MARG, CONNAUGHT PLACE,
         NEW DELHI - 110001. EMAIL:[email protected]
      8. ADDL.R8. SUNIL MATHEW OWNER AT I2I NEWS, ALTHARAKKAL BUILDING, O
         STREET, JAWAHAR NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, KERALA - 695003 (IS
         IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 1-07-2023 IN IA 2/2023 IN WPC 36896/2023)


        Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
   stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
   pleased to direct respondents 2 & 3 to direct respondents 5 and 6 to
   immediately and temporarily block the video uploaded in You Tube at URL:
 WP(C) No.36896/2022                           2/2

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyVdZAacpyM, at the earliest, pending
   final disposal of the writ petition.

        This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and
   the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and upon hearing the arguments of
   M/S. GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL), MANU SRINATH, NIMESH THOMAS &
   SHERIN EDISON, Advocates for the petitioner, DEPUTY SOLICITOR GENERAL OF
   INDIA for the respondents 1 to 3, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the respondents 4
   & 5 and of M/S. Riji Rajendran, MITHA SUDHINDRAN, BHAIRAVI S.N, SOURADH C.
   VALSON, Advocates for the respondent No.6, the court passed the following:

                                         ORDER

When this matter was called today, Sri.Santhosh Mathew, Learned Counsel for R6 and R7 submitted that it will be difficult for his client to decide a complaint of an individual, as to whether the uploaded information is defamatory or otherwise. He submitted that this has to be done by the competant Authority or the affected person will have to approach the competant Court.

The pleadings on record do not indicate any protocols that are in place with respect to the modest to be followed by a person - whether directly affected or otherwise - in seeking to redress the damage caused on account of defamatory or such other online content.

The Deputy Solicitor General Of India will obtain specific instructions from R5 as to the protocols to be followed in the case of a citizen wants to make complaint against the information uploaded on a platform like R7.

Post on 21.09.2023.

Hand over.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE 13-09-2023 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar