Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Ziyad Rahman A.A., J
Anto Augustine – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background regarding allegations of defamation and failure of intermediary action. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. counter-arguments by respondents regarding lack of 'originator' status and limited intermediary liability. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. analysis of it act and ethics code rules governing intermediary responsibilities. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. summary of rival constitutional contention regarding rights under article 19 vs defamation. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. intermediary liability for defamation requires a competent court order for content removal. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 6. writ jurisdiction is not appropriate for private law disputes and claims for compensation. (Para 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
J U D G M E N T
This writ petition is submitted by the petitioners who are the managerial employees of M/s. Broadcasting Company Pvt. Ltd., a news and current affairs content broadcasting channel in India. The grievance highlighted by the petitioners in this writ petition is against certain contents of the publications made by 6th and 7th respondents through the social media platforms, operated and
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
