"Right To Be Forgotten": Karnataka HC Allows Plea Of Man Implicated In False POCSO Case To Mask His Name From Court's Digital Records
The Karnataka High Court allowed the plea of a man who was falsely implicated in a POCSO case to mask his name in digital records of the Court.
The court said that after the accused gets blame-free by a process of law, he cannot be seen to be carrying the sword of him being accused on his head, for all his life.
The petitioner had approached the court on the ground that when the name of the petitioner was clicked on any search engine, it revealed him to be an accused in a sexual harassment case. An FIR was registered against the petitioner under Sections 354A and 354B of the IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act for exchanging lewd messages with a minor girl. However, when the Police conducted a detailed investigation, it found it to be a false case registered against the petitioner.
Despite being cleared of charges, the petitioner contended that the digital records negatively impacted his employment prospects. He further argued for masking of his name in the digital records of the Court, emphasising his right to live with dignity.
The Court had to address the issue as to whether the name of an accused, even after being declared to be innocent, should be masked in the digital records of the Court.
A Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna observed, “In the crime, once the accused gets acquitted - honourably, discharged by a competent Court of law, or this Court would quash those crimes in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and those orders become final, the shadow of crime, if permitted to continue in place of shadow of dignity, on any citizen, it would be travesty of the concept of life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Advocate Abhinaya K. represented the petitioner, while HCGP Kiran Kumar appeared for the respondents.
The Court remarked, “If the result of due process of law is absolving of any person of alleged guilt, those persons become the ones who would get a right to live with dignity, having no blame against them.”
The Court discussed the quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. due to frivolous or vengeful reasons and noted, “It is therefore, after the accused gets blame-free by a process of law, he cannot be seen to be carrying the sword of him being accused on his head, for all his life. Right to oblivion; right to be forgotten are the principles evolved by the democratic nations, as one being a facet of right to informational privacy.”
The Court discussed the evolving concept of a right to be forgotten or right to erasure and stated that the High Court of Delhi permitted the masking of the name of the accused in all the search engines.
The Court clarified that “it is made clear that mere erasure of the name of the petitioner in the cause title, does not mean that he is entitled to seek such erasure from the police records. The direction would be only to enable the internet forget, like the humans forget. If it is allowed to stay on record, the internet will never permit the humans to forget.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the writ petition and directed the Registrar General of the High Court of Karnataka to mask the name of the petitioner in its digital records.
Cause Title: XYZ v. The Registrar General & Ors.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Abhinaya K.
Respondents: Advocate B.V. Vidyulatha and HCGP Kiran Kumar
