Introduction
In today’s digital world, information shared online can remain accessible indefinitely. While the internet has made communication and access to knowledge easier, it has also created challenges for individuals whose personal information continues to exist online long after it has lost its relevance. This concern has led to the growing recognition of the Right to Be Forgotten (RTBF)—the right of an individual to request the removal or de-indexing of personal information from public access under certain circumstances.
Constitutional Basis: Link to the Right to Privacy
The Right to Be Forgotten is closely linked to the right to privacy, which was recognised as a fundamental right by the Supreme Court of India in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017). Although the Court did not explicitly establish RTBF as a separate fundamental right, it acknowledged that informational privacy forms an essential part of Article 21 of the Constitution.
Also Read – What is Public Interest Litigation (PIL)? Role of PIL in Protecting Fundamental Rights in India
International Origins: The Google Spain Judgment and GDPR
Internationally, the concept gained prominence after the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered its landmark judgment in Google Spain SL v. Agencia Española de Protección de Datos & Mario Costeja González (2014). The Court held that search engines may be required to remove links containing outdated or irrelevant personal information upon a valid request. This principle is now reflected in Article 17 of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which grants individuals the “Right to Erasure” subject to important exceptions such as freedom of expression, public interest, and legal obligations.
Judicial Recognition in India
In India, there is no standalone legislation specifically guaranteeing the Right to Be Forgotten. However, courts have increasingly recognised the need to protect individuals from unnecessary digital exposure. Various High Courts, including the Karnataka, Delhi, Kerala, and Orissa High Courts, have considered requests for removal or masking of personal information, particularly in cases involving acquittals, victims of offences, matrimonial disputes, and juvenile justice. The relief granted has depended on balancing privacy rights with transparency, public records, and freedom of speech.
The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023
The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) strengthens an individual’s control over personal data by providing rights to correction, updating, and erasure of personal data under specified conditions. While the Act does not expressly create a “Right to Be Forgotten,” it introduces a legal framework that supports greater data protection and accountability of data fiduciaries.
Legal and Ethical Concerns
Despite its benefits, the Right to Be Forgotten raises significant legal and ethical concerns. Critics argue that unrestricted removal of online information may affect the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a), interfere with the public’s right to know, and compromise historical and judicial records. Therefore, courts must carefully assess whether the information is outdated, inaccurate, no longer necessary, or whether its continued publication serves a legitimate public interest.
Conclusion
As India continues to strengthen its data protection regime, the Right to Be Forgotten will likely play an increasingly important role in safeguarding personal dignity and privacy. However, its implementation must ensure a careful balance between an individual’s right to move beyond past events and society’s interest in preserving transparency, accountability, and freedom of information. A balanced legal framework, supported by judicial oversight, is essential to ensure that privacy and public interest coexist in the digital era.