Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

DISCUSSION

20. We have heard the detailed submissions of the parties and perused the records as well as the case law relied upon. The right to be forgotten was first recognized in French jurisprudence and referred to as le droit à l'oubli. The 11 2020 SCC OnLine Ori 878 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis right was conferred upon convicts who had been released to help them make a fresh start in their lives, independent of their past by allowing them to seek erasure of their names from official databases.

636.Thus, the European Union Regulation of 2016 has recognized what has been termed as ‘the right to be forgotten’. This does not mean that all aspects of earlier existence are to be obliterated, as some may have a social ramification. If we were to recognize a similar right, it would only mean that an individual who is no longer desirous of his personal data to be processed or stored, should be able to remove it from the system where the personal data/ information is no longer necessary, relevant, or is incorrect and serves no legitimate interest. Such a right cannot be exercised where the information/ data is necessary, for exercising the right of freedom of expression and information, for compliance with legal obligations, for the Supra performance of a task carried out in public interest, on the grounds of public interest in the area of public health, for archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific or historical research purposes or statistical purposes, or for the establishment, exercise https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis or defence of legal claims. Such justifications would be valid in all cases of breach of privacy, including breaches of data privacy.

61. As the writ petitioner points out, he does not seek statutory protection but rather the exercise of discretion by the Court for enforcement of his fundamental right of erasure. The ‘Right to be forgotten’, or rather the ‘Right to be remembered well’, cannot be denied to a person if the facts and circumstances so commend it.

62. The concerns of privacy so acutely felt now, are a feature of the Internet age. The uncontrolled and unbridled dissemination and availability of information that have been noted in the judgement in K.S.Puttaswamy necessitate such discretion in appropriate circumstances and if the Court were certain that the claim of the person is indeed justified. We are thus of the considered view that granting the relief of masking/redaction of information https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis from certified copies that are issued for public circulation must be enabled in appropriate situations.

ii. We hold that right to be forgotten cannot be claimed in current proceedings or in a proceedings of recent origin. It is for the Legislature to fix grounds for the invocation of such a right. However, the Court, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and duration involved related to a crime or any other litigation, may permit a party to invoke the above rights to de-index and to remove the personal information of the party from search engines. The Court, in appropriate cases, is also entitled to invoke principles related to the right to erasure to allow a party to erase and delete personal data that is available online.