Read Time: 05 minutes

Justice Rekha Palli of the Delhi High Court today issued notices and sought replies from the information as well as communications ministries, Google LLC, Twitter and two media houses on a petition seeking removal of certain articles from the internet relating to the petitioner’s conviction in a fraud and blackmailing case abroad.

The petitioner was convicted by Leicester Crown Court, on charges of fraud blackmail, in lieu of which he was sentenced to 9 years imprisonment.

He was released from prison after undergoing the sentence with remissions, and thereafter deported to India.

On his return he found articles relating to his conviction in 2015 accessible on the internet and contended that this had adversely affected the lives of his children during his trial and incarceration were still accessible through search engines on the internet.

The petition said Article 20 of the Constitution protects a person from prosecution and punishment for the same offence more than once and this protection was of no avail to him against the exposure to torment inflicted on him after he had undergone the sentence imposed by law in the social life of the person and his family.

Talking about the right to be forgotten, the petition said, “The provisions of Article 21 have been interpreted by the Apex Court to include the right to privacy of a citizen."

He stated that legal jurisdictions abroad recognise the right to reform and the right to be forgotten after a person has undergone a sentence for a crime in appropriate circumstances, however, there is no corresponding law in India for this as of date.

He pointed out that, "The right to privacy is, however, broad enough to consider such cases appropriately," and said that even after undergoing sentence for 9 years and paying hefty fine he is still being humiliated due to the half-truth publications/ articles published in the websites.

He alleged that some articles published by mediahouses show "brutal unreasonableness and anti-rehabilitative attitude," and are "violative of constitutionality" insofar as they "do not serve valid penal objective."

Thus the petitioner has prayed for the taking down of the content and removing/ disabling access of such articles and blogs.

Cause Title: Mohammed Umar Ashrafi Versus Union Of India & Ors.