The High court of karnataka Live has taken up an unusual international legal matter after a judge from Supreme Court of Sri Lanka approached the Indian court seeking removal of alleged defamatory online content about him.
Justice A. H. M. D. Nawaz filed a petition requesting that certain online articles and search results about him be removed from the internet under the principle known as the “Right to be Forgotten.” The High Court has now issued notices to the Indian government and Google, asking them to respond to the plea.
The case highlights growing concerns about online reputation, privacy rights, and the responsibilities of tech platforms in the digital age.
What the High court of karnataka Live Ordered
During a hearing, Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum directed notices to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and Google India after reviewing the petition.
The court has asked the authorities to submit their response regarding the request to remove allegedly defamatory content and URLs linked to the judge. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on March 16, 2026.
At this stage, the High court of karnataka Live has not issued any final order. It has only begun the legal process by seeking responses from the concerned parties.
Why the Sri Lankan Judge Filed the Petition
Justice Nawaz claims that several online articles published in 2015 and 2020 contain misleading and defamatory allegations against him. According to the petition, these articles continue to appear in search results even though the related legal case was later dismissed.
The judge argues that the continued presence of such content damages his professional reputation and personal dignity as a member of the judiciary.
He also stated that the articles spread widely on the internet and caused harm to his international reputation as a legal professional.
Because search engines still display links to these reports, he has asked the court to order their removal and prevent them from appearing again online.
Why the Case Was Filed in India
Although the dispute involves a Sri Lankan judge, the petition was filed in India because major internet services related to the case operate from here.
According to the petition, Google India’s presence in Bengaluru makes the Indian court a relevant authority for seeking removal of the search results.
In addition to Google, the petition also mentions Sri Lankan websites that allegedly published the articles.
Understanding the “Right to Be Forgotten”
The “Right to be Forgotten” is a legal concept that allows individuals to request the removal of outdated or harmful information about them from online platforms.
In India, this right is often linked to the broader Right to Privacy under the Constitution. Courts sometimes consider such requests when old or inaccurate information continues to affect a person’s reputation or privacy.
However, this right must be balanced with freedom of speech and public interest, which makes such cases complex.
Why This Case Is Important
This case could have wider implications for how online reputation and privacy rights are handled in India.
If the court eventually allows the removal of such content, it may strengthen the legal recognition of the “Right to be Forgotten” in Indian digital law.
Read More : High Court of Karnataka: Latest Rulings on Rahul Gandhi, Sand Mining & Cyber Fraud
At the same time, the case also raises questions about how search engines and online platforms should handle requests to remove content that may affect public figures.
What Happens Next (High court of karnataka Live)
The High court of karnataka Live will hear the matter again after receiving responses from the Union government, Google, and other parties.
The next hearing is scheduled for March 16, 2026, where the court may decide how the case should proceed.
Until then, no content removal has been ordered, and the case remains under judicial consideration.
FAQ(High court of karnataka Live)
1. Why did the Sri Lankan judge approach the High court of karnataka Live?
He approached the court seeking removal of alleged defamatory online content that appears in Google search results and harms his reputation.
2. What is the “Right to be Forgotten”?
It is a legal principle allowing individuals to request removal of outdated or harmful information about them from the internet.
3. Did the High Court order the content to be removed?
No. The court has only issued notices and asked the government and Google to respond.
4. When will the court hear the case again?
The next hearing is scheduled for March 16, 2026.