Neutral Citation Number: 2023:DHC:2806 redressal mechanism available to the users was not before the Supreme Court in the said case. e. The decision of this Court in X v. Union of India (supra) in a similar matter had already directed the Respondent-intermediaries therein to remove the content within twenty-four hours as per Rule 3(2)(b) of the IT Rules as well as to endeavour to employ pro-active monitoring by using automated tools, to identify and remove or disable access to any content which is “exactly identical” to the offending content that is subject matter of the Court order. It was also observed by this Court that for the Order of the Court to be effective in India, the content would have to be blocked by the intermediary globally. f. The judgment of the Supreme Court in Sabu Mathew George v. Union of India, (2018) 3 SCC 229,was relied upon to state that in the matter therein, the Supreme Court had directed search engines to delete advertisements pertaining to pre-natal sex determination within thirty-six hours of being informed of the same. The Order dated 16.02.2017 in the matter therein was passed to make search engines responsive to Indian law. g. Respondent intermediaries are multi-billion dollar entities which possess vast technological and economic resources to develop the requisite tools for removal of NCII content. Moreover, there are existing tools for prevention of copyright infringement and child Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHAZAAD ZAKIR Signing Date:26.04.2023 17:19:50 W.P.(CRL) 1505/2021 Page 40 of 88