Court Balances Freedom of Press Against Individual's Right to Dignity and Privacy, Citing Article 21 of the Constitution
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has reinforced the "right to be forgotten," affirming that an individual's dignity and privacy can outweigh the freedom of press under certain circumstances. This decision arises from a case involving IE Online Media Services Private Limited and Nitin Bhatnagar, where the court upheld interim relief granted to Bhatnagar, a professional banker, to prevent the continued circulation of news articles associating him with criminal allegations post-exoneration.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha, emphasizes the balance between Article 19(1)(a) concerning freedom of speech and expression, and Article 21, which protects an individual's right to dignity and privacy. The court noted that while media freedom is fundamental, it is not absolute and must be balanced against the potential harm to an individual's reputation and dignity.
The case stems from Bhatnagar's arrest by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) in August 2023, linked to alleged irregularities involving M/s Moser Baer India Limited. Though discharged by the jurisdictional court in August 2024 due to lack of evidence, media articles continued to circulate, perpetuating a misleading narrative of guilt.
IE Online Media Services argued for the public's right to information and claimed updates reflecting Bhatnagar's discharge were incorporated. However, the court found these insufficient to mitigate the reputational damage.
Justice Sudha highlighted the irreparable harm caused by the continued availability of defamatory content, asserting that such content must yield to the individual's right to dignity, particularly after exoneration. The court cited precedents affirming the right to be forgotten as integral to privacy rights, referencing judgments like K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, which underscored privacy as a fundamental right.
The ruling dismissed the appeal by IE Online Media Services, supporting the trial court's interim injunction to restrain further circulation of defamatory content and mandate de-indexing and de-referencing of related URLs.
This decision marks a pivotal moment for privacy rights in India, setting a precedent for balancing media freedom with individual dignity in the digital age. It underscores the judiciary's role in evolving legal standards to protect personal privacy against the backdrop of pervasive digital information.
Bottom Line:
Right to be forgotten - Continued digital availability of content associating an individual with criminal allegations, even after their exoneration, raises concerns of enduring reputational harm and stigma, and in appropriate cases, must yield to an individual's right to dignity and privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Statutory provision(s): Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India, Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order XLIII Rule 1(r), Limitation Act, 1963 Article 75
IE Online Media Services Private Limited v. Nitin Bhatnagar, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2823549
