Delhi High Court
T.V. Today Network Limited And Anr. vs Union Of India And Ors. on 4 April, 2024
Author: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
Bench: Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
$~47
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 4912/2024 & CM APPL. 20090/2024
T.V. TODAY NETWORK LIMITED AND ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Abhishek Malhotra, Ms.
Subhalaxmi Sen and Mr. Raghav
Shukla, Advocates
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC with Mr.
Waize Ali Noor, Mr. Varun Pratap
Singh, Mr. Kartik Baijal and Mr.
Varun, Advocates for UOI
% Date of Decision: 04th April, 2024
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, ACJ : (ORAL)
CM APPL. 20091/2024 (for exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 4912/2024 & CM APPL. 20090/2024
1. Present writ petition has been filed seeking a declaration that Rule
3(1)(c) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital
Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 is unconstitutional and/or that it be read
down in a manner that is consistent with the intent and object of Section 79
of the Information Technology Act, 2000, Section 52 of the Copyright Act,
1957 and Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The petitioners are
aggrieved by suspension of petitioner no. 1's Instagram account created for
its magazine Harper's Bazaar India i.e.,"@bazaarindia" based on third-party
copyright complaints.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that impugned action has
been undertaken without following any safeguards as provided for the
takedown under Rule 4(8) of unlawful/infringing content specifically
identified to be unlawful or infringing under Rule 3(1)(b) of the IT Rules.
He states that restricting or terminating the petitioner no. 1's access to the
platform is violative of petitioners' constitutional rights under Articles 14
and 19 of the Constitution. According to him, respondent no. 2 is exploiting
the ambiguity created by the language of Rule 3(1)(c) and the third proviso
to Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules to operate and enforce policies that provide
Respondent No. 2 the absolute and unlimited discretion to suspend and/or
terminate its user's accounts without due process or giving the user a fair
opportunity to contest such punitive action.
3. Issue notice. Mr. Kirtiman Singh, CGSC for UOI/R-1 accepts notice.
4. Issue notice to unserved Respondents by all modes, returnable on 17th
May, 2024.
5. At this stage, learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the
Petitioner would file an appeal before the Grievance Appellate Committee
as provided for under Rule 3A of the Information Technology (Intermediary
Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 by tomorrow i.e., 5th
April, 2024.
6. In the event such an appeal is filed, this Court directs the Grievance
Appellant Committee to decide the Petitioners' appeal as expeditiously as
possible, preferably, within two weeks.
7. List on 17th May, 2024.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
APRIL 4, 2024/rhc
