7 content that does not align with the General Terms, Community Guidelines and Privacy Policy or the Platform/TikTok. Furthermore, the content on the Platform is monitored by advanced artificial intelligence enabled mechanism and by human intervention, which ensures a level of content moderation which is unmatched in the industry. 40.Thus the Respondent company has proactive take-down mechanisms including as artificial intelligence powered algorithms that detect illegal content, including such content that is violative of any law, such as Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 66E of the IT Act, 2000, and remove/disable them instantly. This pioneering technology, which required millions of dollars of research & development and is constantly improved to enable better and better content review and moderation. Accordingly, the Respondent Company takes extreme and caution that only such content is shared and displaced, which is lawful, educational and primarily humorous in nature, without attracting the prohibition of any legal provisions or violating the right to privacy of any user.” 10.In the reply, the 9th respondent focussed Article 19(1)(a) of Constitution of India and relied upon several judgments of Honourable Supreme Court. This Court find that the situation here is slightly different and the rights of intermediary, the creator of a platform for users for commercial purpose may not take shelter under Article 19(1)(a) of Constitution of India. However, this Court need not go into all these issues for the present. 11.Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 9th respondent submitted that the irreparable harm by way of loss of jobs and financial investments and reputation suffered by the company should be considered for vacating the interim order. The 9th respondent in that reply relied upon the order of Honourable Supreme Court, while hearing SLP(C)No.9185 of 2019, on 22.04.2019 and pointed out that in case this Court fails to decide on the relief sought by TikTok on 24.04.2019, the ban order, dated 03.04.2019 stands vacated. As a matter of fact and record, the reply affidavit has been filed and served only on 24.04.2019 and no petition to vacate interim order or counter is filed by the respondent Nos.6 or 9 any time before. When this Court asked the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents 6 and 9 that they owe an explanation as this Court presumed that the order of Honourable Supreme Court should have been passed only due to misrepresentation made by the respondents 6 and 9 or the Honourable Supreme Court would not have been briefed about the correct status of the case before this Court with regard to the fact that not even a counter affidavit or any other materials were placed before this Court by the respondents 6 and 9 on the previous hearing date, the learned Senior Counsel tendered his apology. The http://www.judis.nic.in learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and many, who wanted to come on record sought time to go through the reply and the huge