Sanatan Prabhat > Post Type > News > National News > Delhi HC slams ‘Google’ while issuing the notice

Delhi HC slams ‘Google’ while issuing the notice

  • The case of unfair suspension of 5 apps of Sanatan Sanstha by Google

  • Court demands explanation on the reasons for suspension of these apps

New Delhi – The Delhi High Court heard the case of sudden ban on Sanatan Sanstha and its mobile apps on January 10th. At this time, senior advocate of the Supreme Court, Shridhar Potaraju, argues before Justice Sachin Dutta that Google suspended 5 apps of the petitioner without giving any prior notice. In response, Justice Dutta reprimanded Google and asked, “When were the apps suspended ? Was any prior notice given to the petitioner before suspending the apps ?” The judge specifically asked for facts and dates of important events; but it was noticed that Google’s lawyer was avoiding giving a direct answer. At this time, the judge remarked, “I am asking you the same question for the third time; but you are avoiding answering my question.” The judge asked Google to show Google’s policies regarding app suspension and specific content in these suspended apps that violate Google’s policies. He has issued notices to Google as well as the Union Government in this matter. The next hearing will be held on March 18th.

1. Initiation of Arguments by Sr. Adv. Sridhar Ji

Sr. Adv. Sridhar Ji began by informing the Court that Google suspended five apps belonging to the Petitioner without providing any prior notice, which constitutes a violation of IT Rules, 2021.

2. Interjection by Google’s Counsel

Google’s counsel interrupted, claiming that a similar petition had been filed by Sanatan Sanstha before the Bombay High Court, which was dismissed. o In response, Sr. Adv. Sridhar Ji, after taking instructions from Adv. Amita Sachdeva, clarified that the petition in Bombay High Court was against Facebook, not Google, and it was filed before the IT Rules, 2021 were notified by the Government.

3. Reading of Bombay HC Order

The Judge directed Google’s counsel to read the Bombay High Court order. o After reading the order, the Judge noted that the scope of the Bombay petition was entirely different and irrelevant to the current petition.

4. Explanation of the Apps’ Purpose

Sr. Adv. Sridhar Ji provided a brief explanation of the content and purpose of all five apps that were suspended by Google.

5. Judge’s Inquiry to Google

The Judge asked Google’s counsel the following questions: § When were the apps suspended? § Was any prior notice given to the Petitioner before suspending the apps?  The Judge specifically asked for facts and the dates of key events but noted that Google’s counsel was not answering to the point. o The Judge remarked, “I am asking you the same question for the third time, but you are not replying to my question and are not giving proper answers.” o The Judge further directed Google’s counsel to: § Show their policies regarding app suspension. § Show the specific content from the apps that allegedly violated Google’s policies.

6. Google’s Policy and Inadequate Reply

Google’s counsel read out their policy but failed to show any app content that promoted violence or terrorism. o Sr. Adv. Sridhar Ji cited Rule 4(8)(a) & (b) of IT Rules, emphasizing Google’s obligation to: § Give prior notice. § Provide an opportunity for the Petitioner to be heard. o The Judge reprimanded Google’s counsel, pointing out that their reply to the Petitioner was arbitrary and lacked detail.

7. Union of India’s (UOI) Stand

The Counsel for Union of India suggested that the Petitioner should file an appeal before the Grievance Appellate Committee (GAC). o The Judge questioned this suggestion, asking, “Appeal against whose order?” o Sr. Adv. Sridhar Ji clarified that the appeal would lie against the order of a Grievance Officer, but Google has no Grievance Officer to date. o He further informed the Court that: § An internal appeal was filed. § A detailed representation was also submitted to the Ministry, but the Petitioner received no hearing.

8. Judge’s Observations

The Judge expressed dissatisfaction with Google’s counsel, remarking multiple times that Google was evading questions and not providing direct answers.

9. Court’s Directions

The Hon’ble Judge issued notice to Google and Union of India, directing them to file their replies to the petition. o The matter is now listed for the next hearing on 18.03.2025.

Google banned 5 apps of Sanatan Sanstha in 2023

Google had banned 5 apps in the year 2023, namely ‘Sanatan Sanstha’, ‘Sanatan Chaitanyavani’, ‘Survival Guide’, ‘Ganesh Puja Vidhi’ and ‘Shraddha Vidhi’. The reason given for this action was that ‘Sanatan Sanstha is associated with violence against citizens’.

Latest Articles