NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has ruled that social media platforms are obligated to immediately remove illegal and objectionable content, including material that undermines the independence of the judiciary or defames institutions and individuals, without waiting for specific directions from the court.
In a detailed order issued on Wednesday, a bench of Justices Neena Bansal Krishna and Madhu Jain said intermediaries cannot remain “silent spectators” when such content comes to their notice.
“While individuals who commit such egregious and scandalous acts must be dealt with strictly in accordance with the law, intermediaries also cannot be silent spectators and wait for directions from the courts. Therefore, once an intermediary becomes aware of the existence of information being used to commit an illegal act, it is obligated to immediately remove the information, data or communication link contained in the resource controlled by or connected to the intermediary and remove or disable access to that material expeditiously,” the court said.
The court made these observations in its June 8 order on a petition filed by the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) seeking initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against psychiatrist and social activist Dr Kapil Kakkar over social media posts accusing a Delhi High Court judge of being a “murderer” and responsible for the killing of six people in a building collapse in Saket last month.
On Monday, the court ordered Meta, Google LLC,
In its detailed order, the court directed the platforms to block the URLs containing the impugned videos and suspend Kakkar’s social media accounts and handles within 24 hours of receiving the order, until further directions.
The court said the allegations of corruption and collusion against serving judges and government agencies were “completely scandalous” and “aggressive” and amounted to direct interference in the administration of justice.
“Although easy access to social media has undeniable benefits, the need to use these tools responsibly and not as tools to undermine institutions or cause harm to society cannot be overlooked,” the court said.
“Any effort to use it to harm society or interfere with the independence of the judiciary and harm institutions and individuals cannot be accepted in this country, where the rule of law and the principles enshrined in the Constitution of India prevail,” she added in her order.
