Delhi HC Masks Judgment Details in Indian Kanoon Right to Be Forgotten Directive

• The Delhi High Court's directive to mask judgment details in Indian Kanoon has been criticized for its selective approach.
• Indian Kanoon is the only legal database affected by this directive, but judgments will still be accessible through case number and other details.
• The May 29, 2026 ruling aimed to protect individual privacy and 'right to be forgotten', but its implications on data protection are far-reaching.
• Indian Kanoon has appealed the May 29, 2026 ruling, and these appeals are currently pending.
• Lawyers and compliance officers should watch for the potential implications of this selective approach on their work.

Indian Kanoon's Senior Advocate Arvind Datar highlighted that his platform is the only one affected by this directive, and even then, the judgment will still be accessible through case number, citation, court details, and date.

The Delhi High Court's directive to mask judgment details in Indian Kanoon has been criticized for its selective approach. While the intention behind preserving the 'right to be forgotten' of certain litigants is understandable, the blanket application of this principle raises concerns about data protection and privacy in Indian judgments. The May 29, 2026 ruling had laid down guidelines on how personal details may be hidden in publicly available judgments or orders, but its implementation has been inconsistent. Indian Kanoon's Senior Advocate Arvind Datar highlighted that his platform is the only one affected by this directive, and even then, the judgment will still be accessible through case number, citation, court details, and date.

The May 29, 2026 ruling was passed on petitions by diverse individuals who no longer wished to be publicly linked to closed legal proceedings. The single-judge Bench had directed Indian Kanoon to restrict its name-based search functionality in respect of the petitioners, making orders or judgments concerning them accessible only by case number, citation, court details, and date. This directive was aimed at protecting the privacy and 'right to be forgotten' of these individuals, but its implications on data protection and privacy in Indian judgments are far-reaching. The Delhi High Court's decision has sparked a debate about the balance between individual privacy and public access to information. Indian Kanoon has since filed appeals against this single-judge ruling, which are currently pending before a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court.

The selective approach adopted by the Delhi High Court in this case sets a precedent for data protection and privacy in Indian judgments. Lawyers and compliance officers should be aware of the potential implications of this directive on their work, particularly in cases where litigants may try to exploit the 'right to be forgotten' to conceal their involvement in legal proceedings. The inconsistent application of this principle raises questions about the effectiveness of data protection measures in India. As Indian Kanoon continues to navigate this complex issue, it is essential to strike a balance between individual privacy and public access to information.

Lawyers and compliance officers should watch for the potential implications of this selective approach on data protection and privacy in Indian judgments, particularly in cases where litigants may try to exploit the 'right to be forgotten' to conceal their involvement in legal proceedings.

Source: Original reporting via Indian Kanoon