Fairness as a Non-Negotiable in Public Administration - Case Brief: Karthick Theodore vs. Registrar General and Ors. (W.A.(MD)No.1901 of 2021)
Procedural History:
The case started with a 2011 Madras High Court ruling that included the appellant’s personal information. In the case discussed, the court decided in 2024, the appellant went to the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court to request that his name and other identifying information from that previous ruling be redacted. He argued that his right to privacy under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution was violated by the ongoing release of such private information into the public arena. He claimed that the revelation had hurt him in real ways, such as having his application for an Australian visa denied. Therefore, without compromising the ideals of open justice, the current procedures aimed to have the court recognize a person’s “Right to be Forgotten” within a broader framework of privacy and data protection.
Background and Factual Matrix
The appellant was charged under Sections 417 and 376 of the IPC. The trial court convicted him in 201, but later, the High Court in 2014 fully, completely and unconditionally acquitted him, which was not based on the benefit of doubt. Following the acquittal, he remarried and has three children. The judgment of both the High Court and the Trial Court has personal and intimate details about him. Being available in the public domain has caused him significant repercussions, as he was denied a visa to travel to Australia by authorities, citing the criminal cases. The appellant has filed a plea seeking a mandamus directing the Registrar General, Additional Registrar General, and Registrar (IT-Statistics) as R1, R2, R3 to redact his name and other identities from the acquittal judgment. He has sought a direction from Ikanoon Software Development Private Limited (R4) to reflect the redaction in its publication.
Issue
- Whether a writ of mandamus can lie against a High Court for redaction of personal details from its own judgment, or does such a prayer tantamount to a High Court issuing a writ against itself?
- Whether the High Court, being a Court of Record under Article 215 of the Indian Constitution, is entitled to preserve its record for perpetuity in its original form without any modification or redaction?
- Whether the ‘Right to be Forgotten' can be recognised and enforced in the absence of a specific statutory provision or Supreme Court direction, given that it constitutes an exception to the fundamental principle of open courts and open justice?
Adjudication and Reasoning
The division bench has allowed the Writ appeal and granted the following relief:
- R4 directed to take down the judgment in Crl.A. (MD) No.321 of 2011 dated 30.04.2014 forthwith.
- R1 to R3 directed to redact the name and other details of the Writ Petitioner relating to his identity from the judgment dated 30.04.2014 in Crl.A.(MD) No. 321 of 2011 and ensure that only the redacted judgment is available for publication or for uploading.
Rule
- Courts have a wide discretion in deciding whether to allow redaction or not. Such discretion can either be granted at the request of the party seeking redaction or, in appropriate cases, even suo moto by the court.
- The accused who have earned full, complete and unconditional acquittal without any benefit of doubt have a legitimate claim to move forward for redaction of personal information.
- The open Court doesn’t require absolute disclosure of all personal information, and the courts, while deciding the concern of privacy and the right to ensure that in litigations to leave behind parts of their past which are no longer relevant, have to balance the concept of open Court on the one hand and privacy concerns of a citizen on the other.
- As the High Court is the repository of a wide range of information and is entitled to preserve the original record in perpetuity. However, without diluting the sanctity of the original record, the public reflection of that record can be moderated to preserve the privacy of the person to whom that record pertains.
Reasoning
- Drawing on the judgment K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, the court found Article 21 to protect not only informational privacy but also the "right to be forgotten," which gives individuals the right to request the deletion of any personal data when there is no longer any legitimate public interest in retaining such information. Such irreparable reputational damage is thus an infringement on constitutional privacy that demands judicial redaction.
- The court rejected the argument that a writ against its own order is impermissible, drawing a distinction between challenging the legal correctness of a judgment and seeking redaction of personal information. Allowing redaction will not question the validity of the judgment; rather, it will simply change its public appearance to ensure privacy.
- Since a High Court is a Court of Record with an obligation to preserve its judgments in their unaltered form forever, the court held here that such internal maintenance of complete records was not incompatible with the issuance of a redacted public version. Institutional integrity is maintained when the original kept in the archives is supplemented with a public version that masks the privacy areas.
- Open justice principles work to establish transparency, accountability, and public confidence, but these are not absolute. The court took a proportionality stance: personal identifiers, where they neither educate nor have precedential value and continue to inflict harm, may be expunged without affecting the established legal principles of judgment.
- Although the DPDP Act exempts courts from several statutory obligations, the court held that it can, by virtue of its inherent discretion, protect personal data, and in so doing, exercise that power without the need for any legislative command. Traditionally the Madras High Court rules provide for the possibility of restriction of certified copies, thus establishing redaction as feasible both legally and administratively.
Related Blogs
Social media has become far more than a tool of communication, engagement and entertainment. It shapes politics, community identity, and even shapes agendas. When misused, the consequences can be grave: communal disharmony, riots, false rumours, harassment or worse. Emphasising the need for digital Atmanirbhar, Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently urged India’s youth to develop the country’s own social media platforms, like Facebook, Instagram and X, to ensure that the nation’s technological ecosystems remain secure and independent, reinforcing digital autonomy. This growing influence of platforms has sharpened the tussle between government regulation, the independence of social media companies, and the protection of freedom of expression in most countries.
Why Government Regulation Is Especially Needed
While self-regulation has its advantages, ‘real-world harms’ show why state oversight cannot be optional:
- Incitement to violence and communal unrest: Misinformation and hate speech can inflame tensions. In Manipur (May 2023), false posts, including unverified sexual-violence claims, spread online, worsening clashes. Authorities shut down mobile internet on 3 May 2023 to curb “disinformation and false rumours,” showing how quickly harmful content can escalate and why enforceable moderation rules matter.
- Fake news and misinformation: False content about health, elections or individuals spreads far faster than corrections. During COVID-19, an “infodemic” of fake cures, conspiracy theories and religious discrimination went viral on WhatsApp and Facebook, starting with false claims that the virus came from eating bats. The WHO warned of serious knock-on effects, and a Reuters Institute study found that although such claims by public figures were fewer, they gained the highest engagement, showing why self-regulation alone often fails to stop it.
Nepal’s Example:
Nepal provides a clear example of the tension between government regulation and the self-regulation tussle of social media. In 2023, the government issued rules requiring all social media platforms, whether local or foreign, to register with the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology, appoint a local contact person, and comply with Nepali law. By 2025, major platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube had not met the registration deadline. In response, the Nepal Telecommunications Authority began blocking unregistered platforms until they complied. While journalists, civil-rights groups and Gen Z criticised the move as potentially limiting free speech and exposing corruption against the government. The government argued it was necessary to stop harmful content and misinformation. The case shows that without enforceable obligations, self-regulation can leave platforms unaccountable, but it must also balance with protecting free speech.
Self-Regulation: Strengths and Challenges
Most social-media companies prefer to self-regulate. They write community rules, trust & safety guidelines, and give users ways to flag harmful posts, and lean on a mix of staff, outside boards and AI filters to handle content that crosses the line. The big advantage here is speed: when something dangerous appears, a platform can react within minutes, far quicker than a court or lawmaker. Because they know their systems inside out, from user habits to algorithmic quirks, they can adapt fast.
But there’s a downside. These platforms thrive on engagement, hence sensational or hateful posts often keep people scrolling longer. That means the very content that makes money can also be the content that most needs moderating , a built-in conflict of interest.
Government Regulation: Strengths and Risks
Public rules make platforms answerable. Laws can require illegal content to be removed, force transparency and protect user rights. They can also stop serious harms such as fake news that might spark violence, and they often feel more legitimate when made through open, democratic processes.
Yet regulation can lag behind technology. Vague or heavy-handed rules may be misused to silence critics or curb free speech. Global enforcement is messy, and compliance can be costly for smaller firms.
Practical Implications & Hybrid Governance
For users, regulation brings clearer rights and safer spaces, but it must be carefully drafted to protect legitimate speech. For platforms, self-regulation gives flexibility but less certainty; government rules provide a level playing field but add compliance costs. For governments, regulation helps protect public safety, reduce communal disharmony, and fight misinformation, but it requires transparency and safeguards to avoid misuse.
Hybrid Approach
A combined model of self-regulation plus government regulation is likely to be most effective. Laws should establish baseline obligations: registration, local grievance officers, timely removal of illegal content, and transparency reporting. Platforms should retain flexibility in how they implement these obligations and innovate with tools for user safety. Independent audits, civil society oversight, and simple user appeals can help keep both governments and platforms accountable.
Conclusion
Social media has great power. It can bring people together, but it can also spread false stories, deepen divides and even stir violence. Acting on their own, platforms can move fast and try new ideas, but that alone rarely stops harmful content. Good government rules can fill the gap by holding companies to account and protecting people’s rights.
The best way forward is to mix both approaches, clear laws, outside checks, open reporting, easy complaint systems and support for local platforms, so the digital space stays safer and more trustworthy.
References
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/need-desi-social-media-platforms-to-secure-digital-sovereignty-pm/articleshow/123327780.cms#
- https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-66255989
- https://nepallawsunshine.com/social-media-registration-in-nepal/ https://www.newsonair.gov.in/nepal-bans-26-unregistered-social-media-sites-including-facebook-whatsapp-instagram/
- https://hbr.org/2021/01/social-media-companies-should-self-regulate-now
- https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/social-media-regulation-in-india
.webp)
Introduction
India is confronting a wake-up call as a recent cyber incident aimed at the aviation sector underscores the fragile nature of digital systems that guide national air travel. The disclosure in Parliament has pushed the conversation on flight safety, signal integrity, and cyber readiness back into urgent focus. In a written response to a Parliamentary question, Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu acknowledged that GPS spoofing, a malicious method employed to alter navigation signals, had been noticed at seven major airports of the country. New Delhi flights had not been affected during the incident, but still, it was an event that again made air travel's safety, GNSS interference, and the overall cyber threat to India's airspace an issue of concern.
The Incident: What Happened?
Initial notices came from Indira Gandhi International Airport in Delhi, where the pilots of the different inbound flights talked about GPS spoofing as the reason for their landing. Spoofing is the process of sending counterfeit GPS signals which mislead the aircraft's navigation systems and may cause a wrong measure of the altitude, the position or the runway alignment. In Delhi, pilots operating under GPS-based landing procedures over Runway 10 experienced errors in their approaches and promptly switched to the alternative procedures without any delay.
The Minister said that apart from Delhi, other airports, viz. Kolkata, Amritsar, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Bengaluru, and Chennai were the 6 airports that recorded similar GNSS interference patterns consisting of both jamming and spoofing. Though no major interruptions or incidents occurred, these occurrences are a sign of a steady and enlarging threat.
Why Is GPS Spoofing So Dangerous?
Satellite navigation and communication systems are the backbone of modern aviation, which is now a matter of great precision. Signal jamming by malicious actors comes with a bunch of risks:
- Diversions and Delays: Pilots may be forced to either give up attempts to land or divert flights, which translates into higher consumption of fuel and more complicated operations due to the case of jamming.
- Threat of Safety Issue: Pilots are trained to deal with such incidents by following the prescribed fallback procedures, but still they depend very much on the GNSS signals that are accurate for safe manoeuvring, especially in low visibility situations.
- Pressure on Old Systems: Indian airports are still in the process of completely converting from ground-based navigation aids to GNSS. Signal disruptions entail the use of older technologies, which results in putting additional pressure on the already overburdened air traffic control systems.
- Opening Up Possibilities for Direct Attacks: Signal jamming can be made a tool for more clever tactics of operation that can include causing confusion during the busy traffic period or performing coordinated attacks to create chaos.
Aviation and Cyber Threats
The disturbances that have been mentioned at the seven airports are not unique. The civil aviation regulators all over the world have already reported an increase in GNSS jamming. The exemplary cases in the Middle East, Eastern Europe, and East Asia have revealed that the safety of airspace has turned into a tactical issue.
Moreover, India's quick adoption of digital technology in the aviation sector could open threat vulnerabilities from state-sponsored groups, hackers. In this instance, the government has not yet announced who was responsible for the spoofing, but the trend points to an adversary with advanced technology.
Government and Regulatory Response
The confirmation from the Civil Aviation Minister underscores a proactive stance by agencies such as:
- Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA)
- Ministry of Civil Aviation
- Airports Authority of India (AAI)
The involved entities are collaborating now to do an inquiry into the cases and set up preventive measures.
The main steps that are taken in response are:
- More thorough observation of GNSS signal anomalies
- More pilot briefings and training on dealing with spoofing situations
- Improving navigation aids to set up a backup
- Working with IT security experts to find out the sources of interference
- Communicating with other global aviation authorities to share the best practices
India, being a significant player in the world aviation market, is not allowed to relax its guard. Cyberattacks on airports show how digital as well as physical security are becoming more and more intertwined.
The Bigger Picture: Protecting Critical Infrastructure
Aviation is a sector that very clearly shows that threats from cyberspace can easily translate into security issues for a nation. The airport system not only becomes more vulnerable to attacks but also the whole aviation industry as the digital ecosystems gain more complex forms together with integrated telecommunications networks, the Internet of Things (IoT)-enabled systems, and cloud-based services.
One of the many threats in the form of GNSS spoofing demonstrates so-called:
- Ransomware attacks on airport systems
- Contamination of air traffic control infrastructure
- Data breaches conducted by insiders
- Passenger data attacks
- Hinderance of airport logistics and baggage systems
What Needs to Happen Next?
India is compelled to embrace a multi-faceted approach in order to manage the intricacies of GNSS interference risk:
- Cybersecurity Measures in Aviation Enforced: New monitoring tools, anomaly detection systems, and instant response plans will be put into service.
- Redundant Technology: The non-GNSS-based navigation system will be expanded to guarantee the continuity of operations in the event of jamming.
- Cyber Drills Across all Sectors: To get pilots, air traffic control personnel, and airport operators ready, the aviation cyber drills will be conducted at the national level.
- Global Cooperation: International organisations will be approached to share the information and standardise the procedures.
- R&D and Innovations: Funding will be directed towards anti-spoofing technology, stronger satellite signals, and the domestic navigation system, like NavIC.
Conclusion
The cyberattack that targeted the seven airports serves as a clear reminder that aviation cybersecurity should not be considered a secondary issue anymore. Even though the quick reaction from the authorities managed to averted any disruptions, the event still shows the vulnerabilities of modern aviation systems. India's air travel infrastructure expansion will be a good time for the country to install its strong cybersecurity frameworks to protect its passengers, maintain the continuity of operations, and secure the airspace of its territory. At CyberPeace, we believe that a coordinated, proactive, and technology-driven approach is no longer an option, it is the new fundamental of aviation security in the digital age.
Reference
Introduction
In a landmark move for India’s growing artificial intelligence (AI) ecosystem, ten cutting-edge Indian startups have been selected to participate in the prestigious Global AI Accelerator Programme in Paris. This initiative, jointly facilitated by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) under the IndiaAI mission, aims to project India’s AI innovation on the global stage, empower startups to scale impactful solutions while fostering cross-border collaboration.
Launched in alignment with the vision of India as a global AI powerhouse, the IndiaAI initiative has been working on strengthening domestic AI capabilities. Participation in the Paris Accelerator Programme is a direct extension of this mission, offering Indian startups access to world-class mentorship, investor networks, and a thriving innovation ecosystem in France, one of Europe’s AI capitals.
Global Acceleration for Local Impact
The ten selected startups represent diverse verticals, from conversational AI to cybersecurity, edtech and surveillance intelligence. This selection was made after a rigorous evaluation of innovation potential, scalability, and societal impact. Each of these ventures represents India's technological ambition and capacity to solve real-world problems through AI.
The significance of this opportunity goes beyond business growth. It sets the foundation for collaborative policy dialogues, ethical AI development, and bilateral innovation frameworks. With rising global scrutiny on issues such as AI safety, bias, and misinformation, the need for making efforts for a more responsible innovation takes centre stage.
CyberPeace Outlook
India’s participation opens up a pivotal chapter in India's AI diplomacy. Through such initiatives, the importance of AI is not confined just to commercial tools but also as a cornerstone of national security, citizen safety, and digital sovereignty can be explored. As AI systems increasingly integrate with critical infrastructure from health to law enforcement, the role of cyber resilience becomes significant. With the increasing engagement of AI in several sensitive sectors like audio-video surveillance and digital edtech, there is an urgent need for secure-by-design innovation. Including parameters such as security, ethics, and accountability into the development lifecycle becomes important, aligning with its broader goal of harmonising with digital progress.
Conclusion
India’s participation in the Paris Accelerator Programme signifies its commitment to shaping global AI norms and innovation diplomacy. As Indian startups interact with European regulators, investors, and technologists, they carry the responsibility of representing not just business acumen but the values of an open, inclusive, and secure digital future.
This global exposure also feeds directly into India’s domestic AI strategies, a global platform informing policy evolution, enhancing research and development networks, and building a robust talent pipeline. Programmes like these act as bridges, ensuring India remains adaptive in the ever-evolving AI landscape. Encouraging such global engagements while actively working with stakeholders to build frameworks safeguarding national interests, protecting civil liberties, and fostering innovation becomes paramount. As India takes this global leap, the journey ahead must be shaped by innovation, collaboration, and vigilance.
References
- https://egov.eletsonline.com/2025/05/indiaai-selects-10-innovative-startups-for-prestigious-ai-accelerator-programme-in-paris/#:~:text=The%2010%20startups%20selected%20for,audio%2Dvideo%20analytics%20for%20surveillance.
- https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2132377
- https://inc42.com/buzz/meet-the-10-indian-ai-startups-selected-for-global-acceleration-programme/
- https://www.businessworld.in/article/govt-to-send-10-ai-startups-to-paris-accelerator-in-push-for-global-reach-558251
