oppn parties Search Engines and Law in India

News Snippets

  • Crude prices fall sharply as Saudi Arabia assures normal production in a few weeks. Prices fall by 5.4% to $65.30 per barrel
  • Sensex tumbles 700 points over fears that rising crude prices will deal a body blow to the tottering Indian economy
  • As Rajeev Kumar fails to appear before the CBI despite several notices, the agency forms a special team to locate and apprehend him
  • S Jaishankar says Pakistan is not a normal neighbour and its behaviour is a "set of aberrations"
  • External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar says PoK in Indian territory and the country hopes to have physical jurisdiction over it one day
  • Barasat Sessions court near Kolkata rejects Rajeev Kumar anticipatory bail application citing lack of jurisdiction as the reason
  • PM Modi celebrates his birthday with Narmada aarti and later has lunch with his mother.
  • All 6 Bahujan Samaj Party MLAs merge with the Congress in Rajasthan
  • Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee to meet PM Modi on Wednesday, state issues on the agenda
  • Pakistan to open Kartarpur corridor on Nov 9
  • Rajeev Kumar, ex-police commissioner of Kolkata and wanted for questioning in the Sarada scam does not appear before the CBI despite the state administration requesting him to do so
  • Supreme Court asks the Centre to restore normalcy in J&K but keeping national interest in mind
  • As Trump accepts the invitation to attend a programme in Houston with PM Modi, India rushes to settle trade issues with US
  • After drone attack on Aramco's Suadi Arabia facility, oil prices jump 19% in intra-day trading causing worries for India
  • Imran Khan raises nuclear war bogey again, says if Pakistan loses a conventional war, it might fight till the end with its nuclear arsenal
Sunni Wakf Board and Nirvani Akhara write to the Supreme Court for a negotiated settlement to the Ayodhya dispute
oppn parties
Search Engines and Law in India

By Sunil Garodia

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Writes for a number of publications.
Can internet search engines like Google, Yahoo and Bing (owned by Microsoft) violate or cause Indian laws to be violated by taking a plea that they are just intermediaries and have no control over the content of websites accessed by Indian citizens through keyword search on their search engines? Obviously, the Supreme Court does not think so. Last year, it had ordered search engines to desist from letting sex determination advertisements appear on any links accessed by Indian citizens by making a keyword search on their websites. Since they had not complied with that order, the court has rapped them recently in a hearing on a PIL and asked the union government to submit a report after consulting experts.

The lawyers appearing for the search engines argued that they were not violating any Indian law. But section 22 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act, 1994 that bans such advertising in India, is quite comprehensive and includes all possible types of advertising through every conceivable means. It says no person or organization can issue or even cause any advertisement to be issued on the subject. While the search engines are not issuing such ads, they are causing access to these ads as the links appearing on their search pages lead one to websites that blatantly advertise sex detection of the foetus.

Although there is no easy solution to this, the court wants the government to consult experts and file a report by 25th July. A complete ban on keyword search related to sex determination tests is neither advisable nor practical. There are a million combinations of words that can be used to get desired results. Since the search engines have a set mechanism whereby results are published, and since they do not have any control over content of third party websites, it will not be possible for them to filter results by which website carries ads and which does not. Since a search for sex determination test cannot always be for clinics conducting such tests and it can be for other information and study purpose, a blanket ban will be unethical and deprive genuine scholars, researchers and journalists access to the huge database on the internet.

The government has a huge task at hand. It must constitute a committee of cyber experts and sit with similar experts from search engines to find out a way to stop the violation of the law. The mechanism arrived at must satisfy the apex court. But the court has given just two weeks for the job and one feels it is too complex an issue for a solution to be found within that deadline.