Supreme Court in K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) v. Union of India,
(2017) 10 SCC 1 to submit that the plaintiff was entitled to her privacy as
a fundamental right. Reliance has also been placed on the decisions of
this court in Jorawer Singh Mundy v. Union of India, 2021 SCC OnLine
Del 2306 and Zulfiqar Ahman Khan v. Quintillion Business Media Pvt.
Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8494 to submit that interim protection can be
granted to the plaintiff as she also has a right to be forgotten. Reliance has
further been placed on the judgment of the Orissa High Court in
Subhranshu Rout v. State of Odisha, 2020 SCC OnLine Ori 878.
10.
Learned counsel for the plaintiff has also drawn attention of this
Court to the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the
Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media
Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (“IT Rules”, for short), to submit that the
defendants were obligated to remove the suit videos. Specific reliance has
been placed on Rule 3(2)(b) of the IT Rules, which requires
intermediaries, such as, the websites/defendants No.1 to 36, internet
service providers/defendants No.37 to 68 and search engines/defendants
No.69 and 70, to, within 24 hours of receipt of the complaint made by
any individual/person in relation to any content, which shows the
individual in partial or full nudity or in some sexual act or conduct, take
all reasonable and practicable measures to remove or disable access to
such content which is hosted, stored, published or transmitted by it.
11.
Ms.Mamta Jha, learned counsel for the defendants No.69 and 70,
however, has opposed the grant of any interim relief, contending that the
defendants were not aware of any agreement that permitted the broadcast
Signature Not Verified
CS (COMM) 392/2021
Signed By:MANJEET KAUR
Signing Date:24.08.2021
22:42:46
Page 4 of 9