Delhi High Court Exempts Meta from De-indexing Orders
The Delhi High Court has ruled that Meta is exempt from de-indexing orders, clarifying its role as a social media platform, not a search engine.
The Delhi High Court has ruled that Meta is exempt from a previous directive to de-index certain judgments from name-based search results. This clarification came in response to a plea filed by Meta, which argued that as a social media platform, it does not function as a search engine and thus cannot comply with de-indexing orders.
The case stems from a May 29 ruling by a single-judge bench, which directed search engine operators, including Google, to de-index specific judicial records from name-based searches. The ruling also instructed legal databases like Indian Kanoon to restrict name-based access to these records, though they could still be accessed through other means, such as case numbers or court dates.
Meta’s Argument and Court’s Response
Representing Meta, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi emphasized that Facebook is not a search engine and has already removed the complained URLs. He sought clarification that the de-indexing directives do not apply to Meta. The court, comprising Justices C Hari Shankar and Nivedita Anil Sharma, agreed, stating that the earlier directions are irrelevant to Meta/Facebook.
The court noted that the opposing parties did not object to this clarification. Consequently, it closed Meta’s plea, confirming that the May 29 de-indexing directives do not apply to Facebook/Meta.
Broader Context of the Right to Be Forgotten
The May 29 judgment recognized the right to be forgotten as an integral part of the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. It established a framework for handling requests to de-index or remove personal information from judicial records uploaded online.
The ruling mandated that names and personal identifiers be concealed from judicial orders available online, while the reasoning, findings, and legal conclusions remain public. Unredacted versions would be preserved in court records for legitimate legal purposes.
The court also directed search engines and legal databases to de-index judgments from name-based searches once personal details are anonymized. However, this specific directive has now been clarified as inapplicable to Meta.
Indian Kanoon has filed an appeal against the May 29 ruling, which remains pending before a division bench of the court.
