DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Can’t allow past case to haunt a person cleared by court, says HC

Petitioner was denied employment due to his past judicial record
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement

Past charges cannot be allowed to haunt a person once he has been cleared by the court, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled. Justice NS Shekhawat held that allowing old accusations to linger would violate an individual’s right to privacy and the right to be forgotten.

Advertisement

“When a person has been exonerated by the court of his guilt, the remnants of such charge should not be allowed to haunt any such person. This will be contrary to an individual’s right to privacy, which includes the right to be forgotten and the right to live with dignity, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” asserted Justice Shekhawat.

The ruling came on a petition seeking directions to redact the petitioner’s name from the e-courts portal in connection with an FIR registered under the provisions of the IPC and the Information Technology Act, 2008. A corporate professional with over 20 years of experience in India and the US, the petitioner contended that he was denied employment due to the presence of his name in court records despite clearing interviews with multinational companies and receiving job offers.

Advertisement

Taking note of the impact on the petitioner’s professional life, the court directed the HC Registry and the officials concerned to remove his name from all court proceedings and search results related to the case. It further ruled that the petitioner’s name in all court records should be replaced with “ABCD”.

The Bench told the petitioner to approach public search engines and social media platforms to have his name masked in the case record. “Whenever the petitioner applies or approaches any of these platforms, it is expected that they would also respect the ‘right to privacy’ and ‘right to be forgotten’ of the petitioner and remove any other material pertaining to the court proceedings,” the order stated.

Advertisement

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Classifieds tlbr_img2 Videos tlbr_img3 Premium tlbr_img4 E-Paper tlbr_img5 Shorts