The Delhi High Court directed LinkedIn to disclose user details of an account accused of posting derogatory remarks against the Indian judiciary. Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja issued the order in a suo motu criminal contempt case, seeking accountability for online content.
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court recently instructed the professional networking site LinkedIn to provide user information for an account that published derogatory remarks about the Indian judiciary.
A Bench comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja issued the order while addressing a suo motu criminal contempt case related to the LinkedIn post in question.
The Court stated,
“As this may have a vital bearing on answering the contempt reference, we would request LinkedIn Corporation to disclose the identity and details of the person who has created this account and uploaded the above referred post,”
During the initial hearing last year, the Court noted that:
“the LinkedIn post titled ‘Sanjucta Kabasi’s Post’ brings down the majesty of law in the eyes of the public and has interfered with the administration of justice.”
Following this, the Court initiated a criminal contempt case against Kabasi, who is a lawyer, and sought her explanation regarding the post.
While hearing the case, the Court inquired whether Kabasi was the one operating the account from which the LinkedIn post was made. Kabasi responded that the account did not belong to her.
The court noted,
We have enquired from the respondent if the said LinkedIn account on which the post appearing at pages 19 and 20 of the PDF paper book was uploaded, belongs to her?
It also noted,
The respondent answers by saying that the said account does not belong to her.
To determine the identity of the account user, the Court also requested the Cyber Cell of Delhi Police to provide details related to the post.
It Requested,
“We further request the Cyber Cell of the Delhi Police to furnish a report specifying (i) the date on which the post appearing at pages 19 and 20 of the PDF paper book was created, (ii) the IP address from which it was posted, (iii) if the post has been removed, the date of removal and the IP address from which such removal was effected, and (iv) the date of creation of the concerned LinkedIn account.”
The Court has instructed the Cyber Cell to submit its report addressing these inquiries within two weeks.
The court gave following orders:
- A copy of this order be sent to LinkedIn Corporation through its nominated counsel (sjkumar@luthra.com, abhishekks@luthra.com and saurabhk@luthra.com) and through the APP to the DCP, Cyber Cell, for ensuring compliance.
- A copy of this order should also accompany the subject post which is appearing at pages 19 and 20 of the PDF paper book.
- The Registry is also directed to paginate the file and supply the same to the learned Amicus Curiae and also to the respondent so that they are able to make their submissions before us.
The next hearing is scheduled for March 11.
Advocate Harsh Prabhakar assisted the Court as Amicus Curiae, while Advocate Kabasi appeared in person.
Case Title: Court on its own Motion Vs Sanjucta Kabasi Advocate
Read Attachment: