Rajasthan HC directs removal of obscene social media content, recognises right to be forgotten

Jodhpur: The Rajasthan High Court has held that unauthorized circulation of private and intimate images on social media constitutes a grave violation of the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21, and recognised the “right to be forgotten” as an essential facet of informational privacy. The Court directed immediate removal of such content and emphasised strict obligations on intermediaries to act expeditiously upon receiving notice of unlawful material.

The judgment was delivered by Justice Farjand Ali in S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1152/2026, Mohan Ram vs State of Rajasthan & Ors., decided on March 19, 2026.

The petitioner, father of the victim, approached the Court seeking removal of obscene and private images of his son that were allegedly being circulated on a social media platform with the intent to tarnish the family’s dignity. Despite lodging a complaint with the police, no effective action had been taken, prompting invocation of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.

At the outset, the Court framed the issue in the context of the constitutional guarantee of privacy. It reiterated that the right to privacy, as recognised in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) vs Union of India, forms an intrinsic part of Article 21 and includes informational self-determination and decisional autonomy. The Court observed that dissemination of intimate content without consent strikes at the core of dignity and results in continuing harm.

Examining the statutory framework, the Court referred to Rule 3(2) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, and held that intermediaries are under a positive obligation to prevent misuse of their platforms. It emphasised that platforms cannot remain passive and must actively restrict unlawful and privacy-invasive content.

On intermediary liability, the Court clarified that the “safe harbour” protection under Section 79 of the IT Act is conditional and contingent upon due diligence. Once unlawful content is brought to the notice of the intermediary, it must act promptly to remove or disable access, failing which it may lose statutory protection.

Importantly, the Court elaborated on the doctrine of the right to be forgotten, holding that individuals are entitled to seek erasure or delinking of personal data that unjustifiably infringes their privacy and dignity. In cases involving intimate content, continued availability serves no public interest and perpetuates harm, making removal imperative.

The Court also addressed the need to balance removal of content with preservation of digital evidence. It directed that while access to offending material must be disabled, intermediaries must retain underlying data such as metadata, IP logs, and registration details to aid investigation and trial under the Indian Evidence Act.

Highlighting the consequences of such violations, the Court observed that non-consensual dissemination creates “enduring digital scars,” causing long-term psychological, social, and professional harm to victims. It noted that such harm is continuous in nature, as digital content, once circulated, is difficult to erase completely.

In its operative directions, the Court ordered the Union of India to coordinate with Meta Platforms (Instagram) to ensure permanent removal of all objectionable content relating to the victim. It further directed that the offending account, if found responsible, be deactivated and permanently suspended. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to approach the Court again in case of non-compliance.

Case Title
Mohan Ram vs State of Rajasthan & Ors.

Case Number
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1152/2026

Court
High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jodhpur Bench

Bench
Justice Farjand Ali

Date of Order
March 19, 2026

Advocates
For the petitioner: Mr. Rajak Khan
For the respondents: Mr. T.C. Sharma (for Union of India)