Neutral Citation Number: 2023:DHC:2806 vii. Search engines must employ the already existing mechanism with the relevant hash-matching technology on the lines of the one developed by Meta as has been discussed above. They cannot be allowed to avoid their statutory obligations by stating that they do not have the necessary technology, which is patently false as has been exhibited during the course of hearing. viii. The reporting mechanism under Rule 3(2)(c) of the IT Rules must be conveyed to the users by the intermediaries by way of prominent display of the same on the website of the intermediary. It is necessary for users to be made aware of the reporting mechanism and the onus for educating the users lies on the intermediaries. ix. The timeframe as stipulated under Rule 3 of the IT Rules must be strictly followed without any exceptions, and if there is even minor deviation from the said timeframe, then the protection from liability accorded to a search engine under Section 79 of the IT Rules cannot be invoked by the search engine. x. When a victim approaches a Court or a law enforcement agency and obtains a takedown order, a token or a digital identifier based approach must be adopted by search engines to ensure that the de-indexed content does not resurface. This means that the user/victim may be assigned a unique token upon initial takedown of NCII content. If the user/victim subsequently discovers that the same content has resurfaced, then it is the responsibility of the search Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SHAZAAD ZAKIR Signing Date:26.04.2023 17:19:50 W.P.(CRL) 1505/2021 Page 86 of 88