Delhi High Court Orders ‘Right to be Forgotten’ Over Court Records – Clash Between Open Justice and Privacy

The Delhi High Court on May 29, 2026 issued an order that a search engine must remove certain details of a criminal case under the right to be forgotten . The order pits the principle of open justice against the right to informational privacy recognised in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2017). The judgment highlights a growing tension between public access to legal records and individual privacy in the digital age. Key Developments The Justice Sachin Datta ruled that merely updating official court records is insufficient because search engines can still display excerpts without context. The order emphasizes that open justice does not require the ability to locate a case using the accused’s name if the record is incomplete. The court highlighted the problem of “incompleteness” – if a person is acquitted, the public should be able to see that outcome, not just the original accusation. The decision calls for regular refreshing of legal databases by platforms that index court information. Important Facts Digital court records are now searchable worldwide, increasing both accessibility and the risk of outdated information persisting online. European jurisprudence on the right to be forgotten balances privacy with freedom of expression; India is yet to develop a clear statutory framework. The High Court’s concern is that search engines may “excerpt small portions without sufficient context,” leading to misinterpretation. Current practice does not obligate platforms to update copies of judgments that have been archived elsewhere. UPSC Relevance The case illustrates the intersection of constitutional law, technology, and governance – core topics for GS 2 (Polity). Aspirants should note how the Supreme Court’s privacy jurisprudence (Puttaswamy) influences lower‑court decisions. Understanding the balance between open justice and privacy helps answer questions on fundamental rights, digital governance, and judicial reforms. Way Forward Adopt a policy of digital accuracy where court registries and indexing platforms must periodically refresh their databases. Legislate clear guidelines for the right to be forgotten in India, ensuring they do not erode the principle of open justice . Mandate that any online repository of judgments display both the original accusation and the final outcome, providing full context to users. Encourage judicial training on digital rights to harmonise privacy safeguards with transparency obligations.