T.V. Today Network Limited v. Union of India and Ors.

1. The present application has been filed by the Petitioners seeking a direction to Respondent No. 2 to restore its Instagram handle “@bazaarindia” (‘IG account’). The Petitioner No. 1’s IG account was disabled by Respondent No. 2 on 15th March, 2024 and its appeal against the said action was rejected by Respondent No. 2 vide e-mail dated 27th March, 2024. In these facts, the Petitioner filed the writ petition aggrieved by the actions of Respondent No. 2.

2. This Court vide interlocutory order dated 04th April, 2024 granted liberty to the Petitioner No. 1 herein to avail its remedy of appeal against Respondent No. 2’s decisions dated 15th March 2024 and 27th March, 2024 before the Grievance Appellate Committee constituted by Respondent No. 1 under Rule 3-A of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (‘Rules 2021’).

3. In accordance with the said order, the Petitioner No. 1 filed an appeal on 5th April, 2024, however, the Grievance Appellate Committee vide its order dated 15th April, 2024 rejected the appeal on the ground that the Petitioner No. 1 has not approached the Grievance Officer, appointed by Respondent No. 2 (first round of appeal).

4. The Petitioner No. 1, thereafter on 16th April, 2024 filed a complaint[1] with the Grievance Officer of Respondent No. 2 impugning the decision dated 15th March, 2024, which complaint as per the Petitioner was rejected on 17th April, 2024 by the Grievance Officer with a two-line response received on e-mail.

5. On the basis of the said email reply dated 17th April, 2024 of the Grievance Officer, Petitioner No. 1 has filed a fresh appeal before the Grievance Appellate Committee on 17th April, 2024, which is pending adjudication till date (second round of appeal). The said appeal is numbered as 1197/2024 and the Petitioners are aggrieved by its non-adjudication.

6. Respondent No. 2 entered appearance on 30th April, 2024 and stated that the email reply dated 17th April, 2024 impugned in appeal no. 1197/2024 is not the decision of the Grievance Officer but an automated response from the system. The learned counsel for Respondent No. 2, however, offered to facilitate the matter and assisted the Petitioner No. 1 to file a fresh complaint Bearing no. 751327807169719 with the Grievance Officer on 30th April, 2024. Accordingly, a fresh complaint[2] was registered by Petitioner No. 1 on 30th April, 2024 and Respondent No. 2 undertook to have the same decided expeditiously.

7. The matter was taken up for hearing today and at the hearing learned counsel for Respondent No. 2 handed over the decision of the Grievance Officer to the complaint registered on 30th April, 2024. The said decision is recorded in email dated 30th April, 2024, which reads as under: “From: FB GO India <fbgoindia@meta.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2024 6:34:27 PM To: himanshu sinha@aajtak.com <himanshu.sinha@aajtak.com Subject: Indian Grievance Officer Complaint #442302294831869 Hi We have received your request seeking to reinstate your Instagram account. As a user of Instagram, you have agreed to our Terms of Use, which states that users are prohibited from taking any action on Instagram that infringes or violates someone else's rights or otherwise violates the law. When we receive a proper claim of intellectual property rights infringement, we remove or disable access to the allegedly infringing content. We also terminate the account of repeat infringers in appropriate circumstances. We received four reports of IP infringement by your Instagram account on November 16, 2023, November 19, 2023, November 22, 2023, and March 1,

2024. We assessed and removed the infringing content for violating our Terms of Use and sent notifications to the account We also warned you on multiple occasions that we would terminate your account if you continued to infringe the rights of third parties. On December 1, 2023, we informed you that the Instagram account had received multiple reports of IP violations in the past several months, and warned that the account was at risk of being disabled under our Repeat Infringer Policy, which states in relevant part: "If you repeatedly post content that infringes someone else's intellectual property rights, such as copyrights or trademarks, your account may be disabled or your Page removed under Instagram's repeat infringer policy." We also communicated with you throughout March 2024, about the IP violations, warning that the Instagram account was at risk of being terminated and encouraging you to resolve the issue directly with the Bearing no. 442302294831869 reporting party. We terminated the account on March 15, 2024, after determining that it had violated our Repeat Infringer Policy. Given the Instagram account's substantial history of posting content in violation of others' intellectual property rights, we are unable to restore the account at this time. Thanks for your cooperation. Meta Inc.”

8. Learned counsel for Respondent No. 2 also handed over a copy of the reply dated 29th April, 2024 filed by it before the Grievance Appellate Committee in pending appeal no. 1197/2024.

9. In the facts noted above, however, the Petitioner No. 1’s pending Appeal no. 1197/2024 before the Grievance Appellate Committee has been rendered invalid as it impugns the email dated 17th April, 2024 on the bona fide presumption that it is the decision of the Respondent No. 2’s Grievance Officer, whereas as per Respondent No. 2 it is only an automated response of acknowledgement of the receipt of the complaint.

10. Learned counsel for Petitioners states that Petitioner No. 1 shall file a fresh appeal during the course of the day impugning the Grievance Officer’s decision dated 30th April, 2024 and Respondent No. 2’s decisions dated 15th March, 2024 and 27th March 2024. He states that Appeal no. 1197/2024 has become infructuous and this Court may record the said fact in these proceedings. He states that directions for expeditious disposal of the proposed new appeal to the Grievance Appellate Committee be issued afresh.

11. Learned counsel for Respondent No. 2, on instructions, states that its April, 2024 filed in Appeal no. 1197/2024 be read as its reply to the Petitioners fresh appeal, intended to be filed today. He states that this concession is being made to expedite the disposal of the Petitioners’ fresh appeal.

12. The statements of Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 are taken on record and they are bound down by the same.

13. The Petitioner No. 1 is directed to file its fresh appeal on or before 02nd May, 2024. In the event, such an appeal is filed, the Grievance Appellate Committee is directed to decide the Petitioners appeal, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one week from its filing. The Petitioner is granted liberty to annex with the appeal, Respondent No.2’s April, 2024 filed in appeal no. 1197/2024.

14. Before concluding, we would like to observe that the automated response issued by Respondent No. 2 to the Petitioner No. 1’s complaint registered on 16th April, 2024 and 30th April, 2024 gives rise to a bona fide impression to the recipient that the complaint has been rejected. The same has led to needless rounds of appeal before the Grievance Appellate Committee in the present matter. Learned counsel for Respondent No. 2 has stated that the issue has been taken note of by the concerned department and the contents of the reply will be appropriately modified.