to tell its users not to host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, update or share any information, which infringes on copyright or other proprietary rights or violates any law. This is buttressed by the fact that under its own Privacy Policy, Telegram does not permit spamming, phishing and other abuses. Under such circumstances, as per clause 2 of its own Privacy Policy, fundamental rights would not come to the aid of protection of personal data related to the infringers, as it is only the “processing” of data, which can be stopped for protection of fundamental rights. Disclosure pursuant to an order passed by a Court of law of the details of the channel operators who are disseminating materials infringing the copyrighted works, or the devices and other gadgets used, cannot be shielded under the grounds of protection of privacy or protection of freedom of speech and expression. Disclosure of such data pursuant to a Court order would not fall in the definition of “processing”, which is the only activity that is restricted by the infringing users’ fundamental rights. Telegram’s own privacy policy does not recognize the defence, which has been canvassed before this Court. (x) Further reliance was placed by Telegram on the laws of privacy protection under Article 21 of the Constitution and Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which protects the right to freedom of speech and expression. The same is completely inapposite in these facts and circumstances. The right to freedom of speech or the right to life including the right to privacy cannot be used by any person or entity, let alone an infringer, in order to escape the consequences of illegal actions. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DEVANSHU JOSHI Signing Date:31.08.2022 12:12:31 CS (COMM) 282/2020 Page 44 of 51