Why in the News?

Last week, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case that could define the scope of the “Right to be Forgotten” referred to in European privacy law as the “Right to Erasure” in India.

What is the ‘Right to be Forgotten’?

• The right to be forgotten allows individuals to remove or de-index their personal information from the internet if it infringes on their right to privacy. It is based on the principle that personal data should be removed when it is outdated, irrelevant, or no longer necessary.
• Affirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the “Google Spain case” (2014), which ruled that search engines must remove data if it is inadequate, irrelevant, or excessive in light of the time elapsed.
• Under the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Article 17 describes the right to erasure, reflecting the concept of informational self-determination.

How is this ‘Right’ interpreted in India?

• Absence of Statutory Framework: India lacks specific legislation explicitly addressing the right to be forgotten.
• Judicial Interpretation: The 2017 Supreme Court ruling in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right. Justice S.K. Kaul’s concurring opinion suggested that the right to be forgotten involves removing personal data that is no longer necessary or relevant.
• Judicial Guidelines: Justice Kaul outlined valid justifications for overriding this right, including freedom of expression, legal compliance, public interest, and research purposes.

How have Courts ruled on the Issue?

• Rajagopal vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1994): The Supreme Court recognized a “right to be let alone” but differentiated it from public records, including court decisions. Once something becomes public, privacy rights are diminished.
• Dharamraj Bhanushankar Dave vs. State of Gujarat (2017): Gujarat HC refused to remove details of an acquittal, asserting that court orders should remain public.
• The Registrar General (2017): Karnataka HC protected the name of a petitioner in a sensitive annulment case, aligning with trends in Western jurisdictions.
• Delhi HC (2021): Extended the right to be forgotten to criminal cases, allowing details of an acquittal to be removed from search results to protect the petitioner’s career prospects.
• Orissa HC (2020): Noted the need for a broader debate on the right to be forgotten, particularly concerning “revenge porn” and online content.

Way forward: 

• Legislative Framework Development: India should consider drafting comprehensive legislation that explicitly addresses the right to be forgotten, aligning with international standards while balancing privacy, freedom of expression, and public interest.
• Judicial and Policy Clarity: The Supreme Court’s upcoming ruling should aim to establish a clear legal precedent on the right to be forgotten, ensuring consistency across lower courts and aligning with global practices.

Mains PYQ: 

Q Examine the scope of Fundamental Rights in the light of the latest judgement of the Supreme Court on the Right to Privacy. (2017)

Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024

Attend Now