"Like China, we are going to block all such websites," Justice Suresh Kait said whereas asking counsel for Facebook and Google India to develop a mechanism to stay a check and take away "offensive and objectionable" material from their web content.
Justice Kait, who didn't keep the proceedings against the 2 websites before magistrate's court, but agreed with the plea of lawyers that they might not press for an efficient hearing within the trial court tomorrow.
Former extra Solicitor General Mukul Rohatgi, showing for Google India, said the postings of "obscene, objectionable and defamatory" articles and different things can not be "filtered" or "monitored".
"No human interference is feasible, and moreover, it cannot be possible to ascertain such incidents. Billions of individuals across the world, post their articles on the web site. Yes, they will be defamatory, obscene however can not be checked," he said.
Rohatgi tried to differentiate between Google India and its US-based holding company Google Inc. "The US-based Google Inc is that the service supplier and not me (Google India) and hence, we tend to aren't answerable for the action of my holding company. Moreover, it's criminal case where a vicarious liability are often fixed on an organization that has no role, whatsoever, within the alleged offence."
Citing provisions of the knowledge Technology Act, the counsel for Google India said the websites are protected by the law in respect of such "objectionable" material to date as
they are not the authors.
The websites could lose the legal protection if they either modify or monitor the article or comments or fail to handle the complaints of an affected person or the govt on such
issues.
Advocate Siddharth Luthra, showing for Facebook India, questioned the authenticity of the documents provided by the complainant to the magisterial court. "We don't recognize on when, how and from where, the documents came into being. they're not the documents as per the provisions of the proof Act," he said.
He additionally said the social networking website can not be held in charge of the acts of the third parties.
The court mounted the case for hearing on January sixteen.
A Google spokesperson said, "We did file a petition before the Delhi High Court. The Court has currently issued a notice to the petitioner. we will not comment additional at this stage."
Earlier, the trial court had summoned the representatives of twenty one social networking sites, together with those of Facebook, Microsoft, Google, Yahoo and Youtube once taking cognisance
of a personal criminal grievance against the websites. It had additionally directed the Centre to require "immediate acceptable steps" and additionally file a report on January thirteen.
Taking note of Vinay Rai's grievance, the court had held that the accused websites connived with one another and numerous unknown persons and are selling, publicly exhibiting and have
put into circulation "obscene, lascivious content." The websites are booked underneath section 292 (sale of obscene books etc), 293 (sale of obscene objects to young
person etc) and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC.
