The Delhi High Court has held that it has the territorial jurisdiction to hear a petition filed by a serving IPS officer seeking the removal and de-indexing of online content related to his settled matrimonial dispute. The Court rejected the preliminary objection that the case should be heard only by the Telangana High Court, observing that part of the cause of action had arisen in Delhi.
Background of the Case
According to the petition, the officer's matrimonial dispute had already been amicably resolved, and the criminal case arising from the dispute was quashed by the Telangana High Court in 2024 following a compromise. Despite the settlement, several online news reports and videos allegedly continued to circulate, identifying him and discussing the dispute.
The petitioner argued that the continued availability of this content affected his reputation and violated his right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution. He sought directions to Google, YouTube, X (formerly Twitter), and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to remove, de-index and disable access to the material.
Court's Observations
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma noted that Google LLC, the Resident Grievance Officer of YouTube, and MeitY are situated within the territorial jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court. The Court also recorded that the petitioner had already sent formal notices to these entities requesting removal and de-indexing of the disputed content.
Take CourtBook Everywhere
Access your account on the go with our mobile app.
Referring to an earlier Delhi High Court ruling recognising the "right to be forgotten" as part of the fundamental right to privacy, the petitioner argued that individuals whose disputes have been settled should be able to seek removal of outdated digital records.
The respondents contended that the petitioner belongs to Telangana and that the disputed reports were largely published by Telugu-language media, making the Telangana High Court the appropriate forum.
However, the Court found that the relief sought was not directed against individual publishers but against online intermediaries and authorities responsible for hosting or indexing the content.
The bench observed,
"Therefore, it cannot be said that no part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court."
The Court further noted that reports concerning the dispute were also published in English by national media organisations and remained accessible across the country, including in Delhi.
Decision
Holding that it has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition, the Delhi High Court issued notice to the respondents. The Court directed them to file their counter affidavits within three weeks, with the petitioner being granted two weeks thereafter to file a rejoinder.
The matter has been listed for further hearing on 21 August 2026.
Case Details
Case Title: K. V. M. R. v. Google LLC and Others
Case Number: W.P.(C) 8465/2026
Judge: Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma
Decision Date: 2 July 2026
