3 grievance, there is a Grievance Officer, who can be directed to conduct an enquiry. He would also submit that even if any inappropriate or obscene is posted, immediately, the Mobile Application will come into play and Artificial Intelligence Moderation Machine and Human Moderation would act as filters. 5. Mr.Arvind P.Datar, learned Senior Counsel would submit that the Information Technology Act, 2002 and Rules and Regulations, are comprehensive enough to address any problem. He also referred to the provision of Information of Technology Act, 2002, particularly, Sections 67(A) and 69(A) and the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 and the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines), Rules, 2011. By referring to some of the provisions of the Rules and the Act, the learned Senior Counsel further submitted that adequate machinery is provided under the Act and Rules to deal with the intermediaries, who fail to act or respond to a compliant or request made by any person, regarding any negative or inappropriate contents, that has been transmitted through the platform. 6. Mr.M.C.Swamy, learned Counsel as a parent/grandparent, would submit before this Court that the children and teenagers, who are vulnerable to pornography are sharing their personal videos unmindful of the possible of consequences causing permanent damages / social stigma. 7. From the above arguments, this Court expresses a serious concern over the possibility of woman and children of our country being sexually abused by video sharing and some predators are exploiting the innocent victims. The learned Senior Counsel for the respondents 6 and 9 has agreed with the same and submitted that the Government should be keen in taking appropriate action in the larger public interest. 8. Having heard the parties, this Court is convinced that Tik Tok Mobile Application is a platform or otherwise called Online Application, which does not have any control over the users. On a perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents 6 and 9, it is evident that the Company has got required Applications, namely, Machine Moderation or Manual Moderation for filtering inappropriate or obscene and negative content of materials posted in the app. Secondly, after the order passed by this Court, the 6th respondent Company is said to have erased six million videos, the contents of which are doubtful. 9. The ninth respondent has filed a detailed reply denying the allegations and highlighting the safety features deployed by them. Para 36 to 40 of the reply are relevant and hence extracted as below: http://www.judis.nic.in “36..... Thirdly, the Platform in India has implemented industry standard solutions to address problems