Rajasthan High Court – Jodhpur
Shubhra Ghosh Baheti vs Union Of India (2026:Rj-Jd:10968) on 5 March, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:10968]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 23571/2025
Shubhra Ghosh Baheti W/o Govind Baheti, Aged About 30 Years,
R/o C-80, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Union Of India, Through The Secretary, Ministry Of
Electronic And Information Technology, Government Of
India, Office At Electronics Niketan, 6, Cgo Complex,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary,
Department Of Home, Government Of Rajasthan
Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. Youtube, An American Online Video Sharing And Social
Media Platform Accessible Worldwide (Parent
Organization-Google), Headquarter Situated At San
Bruno, 901 Cherry Ave, California, United States Of
America (Usa) And Youtube India Office - Google Llc -
India Liaison Office, Unit No. 26, The Ex-Executive Center,
Level 8, Dlf Centre, Sansad Marg, Connaught Place, New
Delhi - 110001, [email protected],
Through The Resident Grievance Officer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nihar Jain
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rohan Ahuja, though V.C.
Mr. Piyush Sharma
Mr. Dilip Choudhary
Mr. Pooshan
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
05/03/2026
1. By way of filing the present civil writ petition under Article
226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs:-
(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 06:14:56 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:58 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10968] (2 of 4) [CW-23571/2025]“It is therefore most humbly prayed that the
present petition for writ in the nature of mandamus may
kindly be allowed.
[A.] By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
objectionable, defamatory, obscene, personal, outrageous
contents about modesty of the petitioner, a married
women uploaded on social media platform YouTube
without her consent and authorization, may kindly be
declared violative of Right to Privacy and Right to Be
Forgotten guaranteed a fundamental right under Article
21 of the Constitution of India and recognised by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgement rendered in
case titled K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India citation
being (2017) 10 SCC 1, AIR 2017 SC 4161.
[B.] By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents may be directed alike order dated
25.07.2024 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
5842/2024 and order dated 07.01.2025 passed in S.B.
Civil Writ Petition No. 21892/2024, filed by the
petitioner to take appropriate action for deletion/ removal
of some more found the objectionable, defamatory,
personal, outrageous video clips of the movies of the
petitioner about her modesty uploaded on YouTube
without her consent and permission. Therefore, following
YouTube link mentioned below may kindly be
deleted;https://youtu.be/Ge79MNtBVn0?si=wnnlv
gfCAzw1EiZd (Annex.05).
[C.] By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents may be directed to implement a “stay-down”
technological safeguard (including digital
fingerprinting/hash-based filters) preventing future
uploads of the same or substantially similar unauthorized
content depicting the petitioner.
[D.] By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents may be directed furthermore to take
appropriate action for deletion/ removal of the
objectionable, defamatory, personal, outrageous video
clips of the movies of the petitioner about her modesty
uploaded on YouTube without her consent and permission
if found any other/anymore video clips/ reels in the future
covering in this Hon’ble Court order upon petitioner
sending direct e-mail to respondent with the
objectionable, defamatory, personal, outrageous video
clips/ links of the movies of the petitioner about her
modesty uploaded on YouTube without her consent and
permission.
[E.] By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents no.3 may be directed to comply with the
Rule 3 (1)(B) (i), (ii), Rule 3(1)(d) as well as Rule 3
(2) (b) of the information Technology (Intermediary(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 06:14:56 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:58 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10968] (3 of 4) [CW-23571/2025]Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021
and to prevent recurrence of uploading objectionable,
defamatory, personal, outrageous video clips/links related
to petitioner.
[F]. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents no.3 may be directed to abide by the
Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and
Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 particularly, Rule
3(1)(b)(i) under which the respondent has to inform its
users as to what is legally permissible and what is not
and further to publish the rules, privacy policy and user-
agreement in a language the user can understand, so
people know the boundaries before they post anything.
[G.] By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
respondents no.3 may be directed to abide by the
Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and
Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 particularly, the
Rule 3(1)(d) to undertake reasonable measures to stop
block/off load the illegal content related to petitioner
which is known to respondent and prevent it from further
spreading.
[H.] By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the
Respondent Ministry of Electronics and Information and
Technology and the Department of Technology,
Government of India, be directed to issue necessary
directions to block and disable all URLs posting infringing
content related to the petitioner.
[I.] Any other writ or direction that may be deemed fit,
just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case
may kindly be issued in favour of the petitioner.”
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds
that this is the third round of litigation wherein the petitioner has
sought blocking/off-loading of the content alleged to be violative
of her right to privacy.
3. Though learned counsel for respondent No.3, Shri Rohan
Ahuja, has raised a preliminary objection regarding the
maintainability of the present writ petition on the ground that the
reliefs sought are directed against a private party, this Court,
keeping in view the fact that on two earlier occasions co-ordinate
Benches of this Court, at the request of the petitioner, directed
blocking/off-loading of the objectionable content, is not inclined to
(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 06:14:56 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:58 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:10968] (4 of 4) [CW-23571/2025]
adjudicate upon the said objection in the present proceedings.
However, liberty is granted to respondent No.3 to raise and press
the same in an appropriate case.
4. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case,
this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the present writ
petition with a direction that a copy of this order be sent to the
email address i.e. [email protected], alleged to be the
uploader of the content in question, calling upon him to off-load
the said content within a period of fifteen days from the date of
this order.
5. In the event that the content in question is not off-loaded by
the uploader within the aforesaid period of fifteen days,
respondent No.3 shall delete/remove/off-load the same from the
YouTube link https://youtu.be/Ge79MNtBVnsi=wnnJvgfCAzw1EiZd
and from all other URL links generated on the concerned YouTube
channel within a period of fifteen days thereafter.
6. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition as
well as the stay application stand disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
9-divya/-
(Uploaded on 05/03/2026 at 06:14:56 PM)
(Downloaded on 05/03/2026 at 08:56:58 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)