The Delhi High Court has issued notice on a petition filed by a serving Indian Police Service (IPS) officer seeking removal and de-indexing of online content relating to his matrimonial dispute which was later amicably settled.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma was dealing with a plea filed against Google LLC and other digital platforms.

The Court ruled that it has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the plea, noting that Google LLC, the Resident Grievance Officer of YouTube LLC, and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) are situated within the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court.

The IPS officer contended that although the matrimonial dispute had been resolved and the FIR registered on his wife's complaint had already been quashed by the Telangana High Court in 2024 on the basis of compromise, several online news reports and videos continued to remain available on digital platforms.

According to the plea, various news channels had published reports sensationalising the dispute and revealing his identity as an IPS trainee, thereby adversely affecting his reputation and privacy.

He seeks directions to Google LLC, Google India Private Limited, YouTube LLC and X Corp to remove, delete, de-index and disable access to digital content relating to the dispute.

The plea also seeks directions for permanent de-indexing of links and adoption of preventive mechanisms such as hash-matching technology to avoid republication of similar content.

Relying on the right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution, the counsel appearing for the petitioner referred to the recent Delhi High Court decision in Laksh Vir Singh Yadav v. Union of India, where the Court had recognised the “right to be forgotten” as forming part of the constitutional guarantee of privacy.

Opposing the plea, the counsel appearing for Google LLC argued that the IPS officer is a resident of Telangana and that the impugned content largely comprised reports published by Telugu media outlets.

It was also submitted that a substantial part of the cause of action had arisen within Telangana and therefore, the petitioner should approach the Telangana High Court.

After considering the submissions, Justice Sharma noted that the petitioner was not seeking relief against individual publishers but had sought consolidated relief against intermediary platforms and authorities.

The Court said that the disputed reports were not limited to Telugu-language publications and that English-language reports by national media houses, including Times of India, The Hindu, NDTV and News18, were also accessible across the country, including in Delhi.

“Therefore, it cannot be said that no part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court,” the Court observed.

The matter is now listed on August 21.

Case Title: KR v. Google LLC & Ors.

Click Here To Read/Download Order