ARTICLE
18 August 2026

Right To Be Forgotten Vs Open Justice: Delhi High Court On Digital Privacy | Podcast Bites

IL
IndiaLaw LLP

Contributor

Founded by Managing Partner K.P. Sreejith, INDIALAW began as a small firm in Mumbai with a commitment to client service and corporate-focused legal solutions. From its modest beginnings, the firm has grown into a respected name by prioritizing excellence, integrity, and tailored legal strategies. INDIALAW’s team believes in adapting to each client’s unique needs, ensuring that solutions align with individual circumstances and business goals.

The firm combines its deep understanding of the local business landscape with experience across multiple jurisdictions, enabling clients to navigate complex legal environments effectively. INDIALAW emphasizes proactive service, anticipating client needs and potential challenges to provide timely, high-quality legal support. The firm values lasting client relationships and sees its role as a trusted advisor, dedicated to delivering business-friendly and principled legal counsel.

In this episode of Podcast Bites powered by IndiaLaw LLP, host Pranjal Maheshwari discusses the Delhi High Court’s judgment in Laksh Vir Singh Yadav v. Union of India and connected matters, decided on 29 May 2026.
India Accounting and Audit
IndiaLaw LLP are most popular:
  • within Law Department Performance, Real Estate and Construction and International Law topic(s)

In this episode of Podcast Bites powered by IndiaLaw LLP, host Pranjal Maheshwari discusses the Delhi High Court’s judgment in Laksh Vir Singh Yadav v. Union of India and connected matters, decided on 29 May 2026.

The judgment examines one of the most important digital privacy questions of our time: whether a person can seek removal, de-indexing, or masking of old court records, news links, judgments, or online content that continue to appear in name-based search results.

The Delhi High Court considered the balance between the right to privacy, dignity and reputation under Article 21 and the principle of open justice, public access to judicial records, freedom of information, and legal transparency. The Court clarified that the right to be forgotten is not a right to erase history, but in appropriate cases, remedies such as de-indexing and masking of personal identifiers may be granted to prevent disproportionate harm caused by continued digital visibility.

This episode explains the Court’s approach to digital permanence, name-based search results, judicial records, privacy rights, public interest, de-indexing, masking, and the evolving scope of the right to be forgotten in India.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More