Madurai: Madras High Court on Tuesday observed that our criminal justice system has not yet reached such a standard where the court can explore orders for the editor of the name accused of objective rules or regulations.
Saying so, the court rejected the request transferred by a man who was trying to revive his name from the assessment of the court that released him from a criminal case.
Justice and Anand Venkates observed, “This court must take judicial notifications about the fact that the criminal justice system that is common in this country is far from satisfying.
In various cases involving cruel crimes, this court without power hit the command and liberation assessment due to the Slipshod investigation, Witnesses are dishonest and the lack of effective witness protection system.
“The court comes to the Prima Facie conclusion that the person accused of entitled to the name removed from the assessment or command and more specifically available in the public domain and which can be accessed through search engines.
However, the judge said that on a deeper review, he had known that it was not as simple and straight out.
There may be consequences if the general order is as followed and the direction is issued.
During the deliberation, the attention of the court is interested in various foreign assessments and relevant regulations and the enactment of various countries that specifically provide expansion, removal, editorial or destruction of criminal records.
“There are no rules or regulations like that in India for now.
In the absence of legal support, this court cannot implement an instructions when there is no standard that can be managed legally in the first place.
There must be the right policy formulated in terms of This is with specific rules.
In other words, several basic criteria or parameters must be repaired, failing that exercise like that will lead to confusion, “observing the judge.
In this case, he said it would be more appropriate to wait for the enactment of data protection laws and regulations that can provide objective criteria while dealing with the application.
Judge further observes that the right to be forgotten cannot be in the scope of justice administration, especially in the context of the assessment delivered by the court.
The direction sought by the applicant is to calm his name from the order passed by the coordinate bench in this court in a regular criminal attraction.
“The point here is that since the High Court is an inseparable institution, a writing cannot lie to the assessment or command that is passed by it for it will be the same as those demanding the High Court opposing,” observing the judge.