Neutral Citation Number: 2023:DHC:2806 the Court may have to recognise his right and direct removal of such content available online on a case-tocase basis. The contention by the learned counsel for Google that they are only an intermediary and they are not liable for the contents or publication of the judgments, no doubt, the said contention has to be upheld. We are not here to decide upon compliance or non-compliance with the Intermediary Rules. The argument of the learned Central Government Counsel that Google has to be treated as an intermediary and therefore has to follow the Intermediary Rules does not require meritorious consideration in these cases. We are called upon, in these cases, to decide on the points involved qua fundamental rights claimed by the petitioners. Irrespective of these rules, the State and non-State actors are bound to respect the fundamental rights of the citizens. There is no difficulty in identifying Google as a non-State actor by its nature of function and operation which could have an impact on the socio, cultural, economic and political life of the citizen. They are qualified to be identified as a nonState actor. Even in the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, guiding principles on business and human rights, an enterprise like Google is liable as a non State actor for human rights violation. Google is incorporated in the United States of America and OECD is an intergovernmental organisation of which US is also a party. The Guidelines aim to promote positive contributions by enterprises to economic, environmental and social progress worldwide. [See OECD Guidelines for Multi-national Enterprises, 2011 Edition]. Further, there is no difficulty in holding that the claim based on fundamental rights can be enforced horizontally. However, the judgments are public records and, making them available to the public to view through the process of a search made online, cannot be found fault with. At the same time, we cannot hold that Google is content blind to the publications made online; can they allow any prohibited nature of content to appear online? For example, paedophilic Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHAZAAD ZAKIR Signing Date:26.04.2023 17:19:50 W.P.(CRL) 1505/2021 Page 75 of 88