SC to examine if accused can seek removal of judgments from public domain after acquittal

New Delhi, July 24

The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to examine the scope and ambit of the right to be forgotten after an accused sought removal of judgments containing his name from the public domain.

Noting that it will have “serious ramifications”, a Bench led CJI DY Chandrachud stayed a Madras High Court judgment that had asked a law portal to remove from its website a verdict acquitting the accused in a rape case.

“How can a court order this? To say that the judgment, a public document, be pulled down will have very serious ramifications,” said the Bench, taking note of the submissions of Ikanoon Software Development Pvt Ltd, a Bengaluru-based legal website.

The firm said the Madras HC asked it to take down a judgment which revealed the identity of a person who was acquitted in a rape and cheating case.

“Issue notice, and in the meantime, the directions of Madras High Court shall remain stayed,” the Bench ordered. The court said it will settle the law on the issue.

In a landmark verdict, the Supreme Court on August 24, 2017 declared the right to privacy a fundamental right under the Constitution, saying it was “the constitutional core of human dignity”.

“The right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 and as a part of the freedoms guaranteed by Part III (which deals with fundamental rights) of the Constitution,” a nine-judge Constitution Bench headed by the then CJI JS Khehar had ruled in a unanimous verdict.

The counsel for the website said the high courts of Kerala and Gujarat have held that there was no right to be forgotten in such cases, while the Madras High Court in the present case took a contrary view.

The Bench asked the counsel, appearing for the person who had moved the high court, “Assuming you are being acquitted, how can the high court ask him (the website) to pull down the judgement which is part of the public document…once the judgement is delivered it is part of the public record”.

However, the Constitution Bench had clarified that like other fundamental rights, the right to privacy was not absolute and any encroachment will have to withstand the touchstone of permissible restrictions. A law to survive a challenge on the ground of violation of Article 21 must be fair, just and reasonable, it had noted. (With PTI inputs)