The Supreme Court of India, under the leadership of Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, has taken up the significant task of examining the “right to be forgotten” in cases involving individuals acquitted of criminal charges. This decision comes alongside the Court’s move to stay a prior judgment from the Madras High Court, which had directed a legal portal to remove a verdict that acquitted a man in a rape case.
The matter arose when the “India Kanoon” portal appealed a decision by the Madras High Court, which had responded to a plea by an individual named Karthick Theodore. Theodore sought the removal of the court judgment mentioning his name from the public domain, asserting his right to be forgotten after his acquittal.
Chief Justice Chandrachud highlighted the complexities of this issue, noting that court judgments are public records. He expressed concern over the implications of court-ordered removals of such documents from public access, stating, “The judgments are part of public records and the orders for their removal by the courts will have serious ramifications.”
The bench posed a critical question during the proceedings: “Assuming that a person is acquitted, how can the high court direct him (the law portal) to pull down the judgment? Once the judgment is delivered, it becomes part of the public record.”
This case brings to the forefront the tension between an individual’s right to privacy and the public’s right to access court records. The Supreme Court’s decision to reevaluate the right to be forgotten could set a significant legal precedent affecting how acquitted individuals reclaim their privacy while balancing the public’s interest in judicial proceedings.
Also Read
The Supreme Court’s examination of this issue is poised to have profound implications on privacy rights, especially in the digital age where information is widely accessible. This case will continue to attract attention as the Court deliberates on the balance between personal rehabilitation and public transparency.
