2 weeks ago
Delhi High Court Defends Public Interest in Name-Based Legal Searches
The Delhi High Court is deciding whether people should be able to find court judgments by searching a person’s name.
Indian Kanoon, a free legal website, wants the court to cancel restrictions on this type of search.
The restrictions came after another judge protected the right to be forgotten for people once accused of crimes.
Indian Kanoon said it had to remove more than 80 judgments because of that decision.
The database said courts should deal with sensitive names when they first publish records.
The judges said searching by a case number or legal idea is much harder.
They said name searches help people find judgments when they do not know a case number or date.
The opposing side is concerned about the privacy of people named in criminal cases.
The court will continue hearing the case on September 2.
The Delhi High Court said name-based searches are essential for accessing court judgments and are not replaceable by other search methods.
The court is hearing Indian Kanoon’s appeals against a ruling that restricted name-based searches on the database.
The earlier ruling followed a decision upholding the right to be forgotten for people previously accused in criminal cases.
Indian Kanoon said it had removed more than 80 judgments and argued that name-based restrictions should be handled by court registries.
The bench will hear the matter further on September 2.
- Who
- The Delhi High Court, Indian Kanoon, and a respondent represented by senior advocate Akhil Sibal are involved; the bench consists of Justices C Hari Shankar and Vinod Kumar.
- What
- The court is considering appeals against restrictions on name-based searches for judgments on Indian Kanoon.
- Where
- The Delhi High Court and legal databases including Indian Kanoon are central to the matter.
- When
- The remarks were made on a Wednesday; the next hearing is scheduled for September 2.
- Why
- Indian Kanoon is challenging restrictions imposed after a ruling upholding the right to be forgotten for people previously accused in criminal cases.
Access to Legal Judgments
Privacy and the Right to Be Forgotten
Name-based searching
Access to Legal Judgments
Indian Kanoon and the bench said searching by name is essential and cannot be meaningfully replaced by searching by case number, date, or legal proposition.
Privacy and the Right to Be Forgotten
The respondent opposing Indian Kanoon’s appeal argued that judgments could be located through a specific legal proposition or other search methods.
Where restrictions should be applied
Access to Legal Judgments
Indian Kanoon argued that removing or censoring names should be addressed by court registries when records are first made public, rather than through broad database restrictions.
Privacy and the Right to Be Forgotten
The privacy-based position supports restricting access to names connected with earlier criminal accusations, following the single judge’s right-to-be-forgotten ruling.
Public interest
Access to Legal Judgments
The bench said public interest favors allowing people to find judgments by name, since users generally do not know a case number or judgment date.
Privacy and the Right to Be Forgotten
The opposing case emphasizes the privacy interests of people whose names appear in records concerning criminal accusations.
Key facts
- Court
- Delhi High Court
- Bench
- Justices C Hari Shankar and Vinod Kumar
- Database
- Indian Kanoon, described as a free legal database
- Earlier ruling
- A single judge directed restrictions on name-based searches and upheld the right to be forgotten in the relevant case
- Judgments removed
- Indian Kanoon said it had taken down more than 80 judgments
- Next hearing
- September 2
- Central issue
- Whether name-based searches should remain available in the public interest
Quotes
Justice C Hari Shankar
Judge of the Delhi High Court
“"No, we don’t agree with you… We are using these search engines day in and day out… it is a herculean effort to do that [search by legal proposition or any other clues except for searching by name]. It is not even remotely a substitute for name search."”
indianexpress.com
“"Prima facie, to say that I should not be able to access a judgment by giving the name of the party… Suppose this principle was made applicable across all legal software, your practice will go for a toss."”
indianexpress.com
Sources
Related news
India's 'right to be forgotten' threatens collective memory and history
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
35 Years On, India’s Liberalisation Faces Renewed Scrutiny
Hansal Mehta Begins Production on 'Scam 2010' with Siddharth Bodke
Notable Figures Born on 29 July
Thane Court Acquits Man in 19-Year-Old Wife Burning Case
