3 weeks ago
India's 'right to be forgotten' threatens collective memory and history
The right to be forgotten is an idea that lets people ask for old news stories or court records about them to be hidden from internet searches.
In India, two courts recently used this idea to help people who were found not guilty in criminal cases.
The courts told search engines and legal websites to make it harder to find certain records.
One court even removed a person's name from its own website.
People who support this say it protects a person's privacy and reputation.
But some people worry that hiding old records hurts history and journalism.
Journalists are called the writers of the first draft of history, and they rely on search engines for research.
Too many hidden records could leave gaps that make it easy for powerful people to rewrite the past.
India's highest court, the Supreme Court, is still deciding how far this right should go.
The Delhi High Court invoked the 'right to be forgotten' in more than 30 cases, letting acquitted or discharged litigants and parties in matrimonial proceedings seek de-indexing.
The Bombay High Court ordered the masking of a litigant's name on its website after quashing a criminal case against him.
Courts ordered private search engines and databases, such as Google and Indian Kanoon, to de-index links to news reports and court judgments.
The 'right to be forgotten' was derived from the right to privacy by one of the nine judges in the Puttuswamy case, even though it was not at issue in that case.
Appeals over the breadth of the right are pending before the Supreme Court of India.
- Who
- The Delhi High Court and Bombay High Court, litigants acquitted or discharged in criminal proceedings, search engines like Google, and databases like Indian Kanoon.
- What
- Courts ordered the de-indexing of news links and judgments and the masking of a litigant's name under the 'right to be forgotten,' raising concerns about journalism and historical archives.
- Where
- India
- When
- Through recent High Court judgments; the underlying right was derived from the Puttuswamy case decided almost a decade ago.
- Why
- To protect the privacy of acquitted litigants — but critics warn it will dent collective memories and let history be revised by the rich and powerful.
Privacy advocates
Journalists and historians
Right to be forgotten vs. public memory
Privacy advocates
Individuals acquitted or discharged in criminal or matrimonial cases should be able to scrub or hide records of their past from search engines to protect privacy and reputation.
Journalists and historians
De-indexing court records and news reports creates holes in archives, hampers journalism and due diligence, and makes it easier for the rich and powerful to revise history.
Reach of the fundamental right to privacy
Privacy advocates
The fundamental right to privacy, including the derived right to be forgotten, should apply against non-state actors such as search engines and the media.
Journalists and historians
The fundamental right applies only against the state; against search engines and the media, a person can only assert a far narrower common law right to privacy.
Key facts
- Courts involved
- Delhi High Court and Bombay High Court
- Case volume
- Delhi High Court decided more than 30 cases together
- Remedies ordered
- De-indexing of links to news reports and judgments; masking of a litigant's name on a court website
- Targets of orders
- Private search engines such as Google and databases such as Indian Kanoon
- Legal origin
- Derived from the right to privacy by one judge in the Puttuswamy case
- Status
- Appeals pending before the Supreme Court on the breadth of the right to be forgotten
- Author
- Prashant Reddy T, co-author of Tareekh Pe Justice: Reforms for India's District Courts (2025)
Sources
Related news
Delhi High Court Defends Public Interest in Name-Based Legal Searches
Karnataka High Court orders Google to mask acquitted woman's name
Delhi High Court orders takedown of objectionable content featuring Tabu
Delhi High Court Protects Tabu's Personality Rights From AI Deepfakes
Delhi High Court Asks If Bachchan Reputation Extends Across Generations
PUCL Urges CJI Action Over Rajasthan High Court Allegations
Supreme Court Questions IPS Deputation for CAPF Leadership Positions
Supreme Court Quashes 20-Year Conviction, Reaffirms Juvenile Legal Protections
Two Years After RG Kar Doctor's Rape-Murder, Case Remains Unresolved
ED widens Chhattisgarh probes with two arrests and searches
