DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGEversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

                      [2017) 12 S.C.R. 153



                 DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE                                A
                                     v.
                    UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
                (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 341 of 2008)
                       DECEMBER 13, 2017                               B
      [DIPAK MISRA, CJI, A.M. KHANWILKAR AND
             DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, JJ.]
       Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques
(Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 - s. 22 - Prohibition of C
advertisement relating to pre-conception and pre-natal determination
of sex and pu11ishment for contravention - Writ petition u/Art. 32
seeking iss11a11ce of necessary directions for effective implementation
of the Act, issuance of direction to the Ministries concerned to block
all such websites, namely Google India, Yahoo! India and Micmsoft
Corporation (/) Pvt Ltd. and ban online sex determination D
advertisements on their websites; and constitute a separate
monitoring committee - Pronouncement of several orders by this
Court - Submission of the petitioner that in spite of the said orders,
Nodal Agency not been effective to stop the offending material being
displayed on the internet and Google India, Yahoo! India and
                                                                        E
Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt Ltd. responsible for the same - Held:
There has to be a constructive and collective approach to arrive at
a solution together with the Expert Committee and the search engine
owners - Duty of Nodal Agency, the Expert Committee and the search
engine owners to see that the mandate of the Act is scrupulously
followed - Meeting to be held within the stipulated period - Direction F
to Google India, Yahoo ! India and Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt.
Ltd. to co-operate and giFe their point of view for the purpose of a
satisfactory solution - Constitution of India - Art. 32.
      Disposing of the writ petition the Court
                                                                       G
       HELD: 1.1 The Nodal Agency and the Expert Committee
are directed to hold a meeting and have the assistance of the
Counsel for the petitioner and his team so that there can be a
holistic understanding and approach to the problem. The Nodal
Agency and the Expert Committee shall also call upon the
                                                                       H
                               153
154           SUPREME COURT REPORTS                    [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A     representatives of Google India, Yahoo ! India and Microsoft
      Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd., who are directed to appear before the
      Committee and offer their suggestions. There has to be a
      constructive and collective approach to arrive at a solution
      together with the Expert Committee and the search engine
      owners. They are obliged under law to find solutions if something
B
      gets projected in contravention of the Pre-conception and Pre-
      natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act,
      1994. The effective solution is the warrant of the obtaining
      situation. The word "solution" is used keeping in view the earlier
      orders and the suggestions given by the competent authority of
c     the Union of India. The duty of all concerned is to see that the
      mandate of the 1994 Act is scrupulously followed. Keeping the
      aforesaid in view, a meeting shall be held within six weeks hence.
      All the suggestions or possibilities must be stated in writing
      before the Committee so that appropriate and properly informed
      measures are taken. [Para 28] (177-G-H; 178-A-B]
D
          1.2 This Court is certain that the Union of India and its
   Committee would be in a position to take appropriate steps so
   that the mandate of the 1994 Act is not violated and the falling
   sex ratio in the country, as noted in Centre for Enquiry into Health
E, & Allied Themes (CEHAT), Voluntary Health Association of Punjab
   (the 1") ana Viil:mtary Health Association of Punjab (the 2nd), does
   not remain a haunting problem. This Court is constrained to say
   so as many are guided by inappropriate exposure to the internet.
   The respondents have a role to control it and if any concrete
   suggestion is given by the petitioner, the same shall be
F incorporated. Google India, Yahoo ! India and Microsoft
   Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. are directed to cooperate and give their
   point of view for the puqJose of a satisfactory solution instead of
   taking a contesting stand before the Expert Committee. [Para
   29, 30] (178-C-E]
G           Centre for Enquiry into Health & Allied Themes (CEHAT)
            and others v. Union of India and others (2003) 8 SCC
            398: [2003] 3 Suppl. SCR 593 ; Centre for Enquiry
            into Health and Allied Themes (CEHAT) v. Union of
            India (2001) 5 SCC 577 : (2001] 3 SCR 534 ; CEHAT
            v. Union of India (2003) 8 SCC 409 ; CEHAT v.Union
H
  DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                        155



      of India (2003) 8 SCC 410 ; CEHAT v. Union of India                A
      (2003) 8 SCC 412 ; Voluntary Health Association of
      Punjab v. Union of India and others (2013) 4 SCC 1 :
      [2013] 5 SCR 111 ; Voluntary Health Association of
      Punjab v. Union of India and others (2016) 10 SCC
      265 : [2016] 8 SCR 192 ; Ajit Savant Majagvai v. State
                                                                         B
      of Karnataka (1997) 7 SCC 110 : [1997] 3 Suppl. SCR
      444 ; Vikas Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & others
      (2016) 9 SCC 541 : [2016] 8 SCR 872 - referred to.


                        Case Law Reference                               c
[2003] 3 Suppl. SCR 593          referred to            Para 5
[2001] 3 SCR 534                 referred to            Para6
(2003) 8 sec 409                 referred to            Para 6
(2003) 8 sec 410                 referred to            Para.6           D
(2003) 8 sec 412                 referred to            Para 6
[2013] 5 SCR 111                 referred to            Para 8
[2016] 8 SCR 192                 referred to            Para 12
[1997] 3 Suppl. SCR 444          referred to            Para 12          E

[2016] 8 SCR 872                 referred to            Para 15
      CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil)
No. 341 of2008.
      Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.                     F
     Sanjay Parikh, Ms. Anitha Shenoy, Ms. Manjula Gupta, Ms. Srishti
Agnihotri, Ad vs for the Petitioner.
       Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG, Ajit Kumar Sinha, K. V. Vishwanathan,
Dr. A. M. Singhvi, Sr. Advs., Ms. Binu Tamta, R.R. Rajesh, Dr. Nishesh   G
Sharma, Ms. Gun want Dara, G. S. Makker, Anupam Lal Das, Anirudh
Singh, Krishanu Barua, Tanuj Bhushan,Aishvary Vikram, S. S. Shroff,
Ravinder Nijhawan, Siddhant Buxy, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Mahesh
Agarwal, Priyadarshi Banerjee, Vishal Gehrana, Vikrant Pachnanda,
Nishant Rao, Arvind Chari, Saransh Jain, Shravan Sahny, Avishkar
                                                                         H
156            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A     Singhvi, E. C. Agrawa1a, Ms. Ruby Singh Ahuja, Vishal Gehrana,
      Ms. Tahira Karanjawala, Arvind Chari, Shravan Sahay, Mrs. Manik
      Karanjawala, Avishkar Singhvi (for Mis. Karanjawala & Co.), Advs
      for the Respondents.
            The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
B          DIPAK MISRA, CJI. 1. The instant Writ Petition has been
   filed by the petitioner, a public spirited person, for issue of necessary
   directions for the effective implementation of provisions of The
   Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex
   Selection) Act, 1994 (for brevity, "the 1994 Act"). The reliefs sought in
c the Writ Petition are to command the respondent Nos. 1 and 2, namely,
   Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare and Secretary, Ministry
   of Communication and Infomiation Technology with the help of its
   agencies such as Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) to block
   all such websites, including that of the r1<spondent Nos. 3 to 5, namely,
   Google India, Yahoo! India and Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. and
D to stop all forms of promotion of sex selection such as advertisement on
   their websites as these violate the provisions of the 1994 Act, and further
   to issue of a writ of mandamus to the said respondents ·to post the
   directions of this Court on the front page of their search engines so that
   there is widespread public awareness and further constitute a separate
E monitoring committee of the CERT and civil society members to check
  ·against any iucure violations.
             2. Before we address the lis that has arisen in the present Writ
      Petition and the orders passed on various occasions, it is necessary to
      state here that the 1994 Act was enacted by th~ Parliament being
 F    conscious of the increase of female foeticides and resultant imbalance
      of sex ratio in the country. The Statement of Objects and Reasons of
      the 1994 Act reads as follows:-
                "Statement of Objects and Reasons
            It is proposed to prohibit pre-natal diagnostic techniques for
G           determination of sex of the foetus leading to female foeticide.
            Such abuse of techniques is discriminatory against the female sex
            and affects the dignity and status of women. A legislation is required
            to regulate the use of such techniques and to provide deterrent
           ·punishment to stop such inhuman act.
H
  DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                            157
                [DIPAK MISRA, CJI.]

          The Bill, inter alia, provides for:-                               A
      (i) prohibition of the misuse of pre-natal diagnostic techniques
      for determination of sex of foetus, leading to female foeticide;
      (ii) prohibition ofadvertisement of pre-natal diagnostic techniques
      for detection or determination of sex;
                                                                             B
      (iii) permission and regulation of the use of pre-natal diagnostic
      techniques for the purpose of detection of specific genetic
      abnonnalities or disorders;
      (iv) permitting the use of such techniques only under certain
      conditions by the registered institutions; and                         C
      (v) punishment for violation of the provisions of the proposed
      legislation."
      3. Be it noted, initially the legislation was named as the Pre-natal
Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1994 and by
Section 3 of the Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and             D
Prevention of Misuse) Amendment Act, 2002 the nomenclature of the
1994 Act has been amended which now stands as The Pre-conception
and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act,
1994 with effect from 1.1.1996. Preamble to the 1994 Act reads as
follows:-
                                                                             E
        "An Act to provide for the prohibition of sex selection, before or
after conception, and for regulation of pre-natal diagnostic techniques
for the purposes of detecting genetic abnormalities or metabolic disorders
or chromosomal abnormalities or certain congenital malformations or
sex-linked disorders and for the prevention of their misuse for sex
                                                                             F
determination leading to female foeticide and for matters connected
therewith or incidental thereto."
       4. At this juncture, we may profitably reproduce the "Introduction"
to the 1994 Act:-
      "In the recent past Pre-natal Diagnostic Centres sprang up in the      G
      urban areas of the country using pre-natal diagnostic techniques
      for determination of sex of the foetus. Such centres became very
      popular and their growth was tremendous as the female child is
      not welcomed with open arms in most of the Indian families. The
      result was that such centres became centres of female foeticide.
                                                                             H
158            · SUPREME COURT REPORTS                        [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A           Such abuse of the technique is against the female sex and affects
            the dignity and status of women. Various Organisations working
            for the welfare and uplift of the women raised their heads against
            such an abuse. It was considered necessary to bring out a
            legislation to regulate the use of, and to provide deterrent
            punishment to stop the misuse of, such techniques. The matter
B
            was discussed in Parliament and the Pre-natal Diagnostic
            Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Bill, 1991 was
            introduced in the Lok Sabha. The Lok Sabha after discussions
            adopted a motion for reference of the said Bill to a Joint Committee
            of both the Houses of Parliament in September, 1991. The Joint
c           Committee presented its report in December, 1992 and on the
            basis of the recommendations of the Committee, the Bill was
            reintroduced in the Parliament."
             5. The Introduction, the Statement of Objects and Reasons and
      the Preamble unmistakably project the scheme which is meant to prohibit
D     the misuse of pre-conception diagnostic techniques for determination of
      sex; to permit and regulate the use of pre-natal diagnostic techniques
      for the purpose of detection of specific genetic abnormalities or disorders;
      to permit the use of such techniques only under certain conditions by the
      registered institutions; and punish for violation of the provisions of the
      proposed legislation. Prior to the present incarnation of the 1994 Act, a
E     Writ Petition was filed before this Court by Centre for Enquiry into Health
      and Allied Themes (CEHAT) and others which has been disposed of on
      September 10, 2003 in Centre for Enquiry into Health &Allied Themes
      (CEHAT) and others v. Union of India and others 1• In the said case,
      the two-I udge Bench expressed its anguish over discrimination against
F     girl child and how the sex selection/sex determination adds to the said
      adversity. Expressing concern over the said issue, it has been stated:-
            "It is also known that a number of persons condemn discrimination
            against women in all its forms, and agree to pursue, by appropriate
            means, a policy of eliminating discrimination against women, still
G           however, we are not in a position to change the mental set-up
            which favours a male child against a female. Advanced technology
            is increasingly used for removal of foetus (may or may not be
            seen as commission of murder) but it certainly affects the sex


      (2003) s sec 398
      1
H
    DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                          159
                  [DIPAK MISRA, CJI.]

       ratio. The misuse of modern science and technology by preventing      A
       the birth of a girl child by sex determination before birth and
       thereafter abortion is evident from the 2001 Census figures which
       reveal greater decline in sex ratio in the 0-6 age group in States
       l.ike Haryana, Punjab, Maharashtra and Gujarat, which are
       economically better off."
                                                                             B
       6. The Court referred to its earlier order dated 04.05.2001 in.
Centre for Enquiry into Health and Allied Themes (CEHAT) v. Union
of India 2 and taking note of various other directions which find place in
CEHAT v. Union of India 3 , CEllAT v.Union of India 4 and CEHAT
v. Union of India 5 , issued the following directions:-
                                                                             c
       "6 .... (a) For effective implementation of the Act, information
       should be published by way of advertisements as well as on
       electronic media. This process should be continued till there is
       awareness in the public that there should not be any discrimination
       between male and female child.
                                                                             D
       (b) Quarterly reports by the appropriate authority, which are
       submitted to the Supervisory Board should be consolidated and
       published annually for information of the public at large.
       (c) Appropriate authorities shall maintain the records of all the
       meetings of the Advisory Committees.                                  E
       (d) The National Inspection and Monitoring Committee constituted
       by the Central Government for conducting periodic inspection shall
       continue to function till the Act is effectively implemented. The
       reports of this Committee be placed before the Central Supervisory
       Board and State Supervisory Boards for any further action.
                                                                             F
       (e) As provided under Rule 17(3), the public would have access
       to the records maintained by different bodies constituted under
       the Act.
       (j) The Central Supervisory Board would ensure that the following
       States appoint the State Supervisory Boards as per the requirement    G
       of Section 16-A:

2(2oon s sec s11

'(2003) 8 SC 409
4
  (2003) s sec 410
'(2003) s sec 412                                                            H
160            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                          [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A           1. Delhi, 2. Himachal Pradesh, 3. Tamil Nadu, 4. Tripura, and
            5. Uttar Pradesh.
            (g) As per the requirement of Section I 7(3)(a), the Central
            Supervisory Board would ensure that the followin.~· States appoint
            the multi-member appropriate authorities:
B            I. Jharkhand, 2. Maharashtra, 3. Tripura, 4. Tamil Nadu, and 5.
            Uttar Pradesh.
            7. It will be open to the parties to approach this Court in case of
            any difficulty in implementing the aforesaid directions."

c           7. The aforesaid directions show the concern of this Court as
      regards the strict compliance of the 1994 Act.
            8. Prior to proceeding to note the nature of interim directions that
      the Court has passed in the present case, it is necessary to refer to two
      other decisions. In Voluntary Health Association of Punjab v. Union
D     of India and others 6 (the I"), the two-Judge Bench reflected on the
      sharp decline in the female sex ratio and observed thus:-
            "6 .... There has been no effective supervision or follow-up action
            so as to achieve the object and purpose of the Act. Mushrooming
            of various sonography centres, genetic clinics, genetic counselling
            centres, genetic laboratories, ultrasonic clinics, imaging centres in
E
            almost all parts of the country calls for more vigil and attention by
            the authorities under the Act. But, unfortunately, their functioning
            is not being properly monitored or supervised by the authorities
            under the Act or to find out whether they are misusing the pre-
            natal diagnostic techniques for determination of sex of foetus
 F          leading to foeticide."
             9. The Court, after dwelling upon many an aspect, proceeded to
      issue certain directions. In the concurring opinion, direction No. 9.8 was
      elaborated and in that context, the opinion stated:-
            " 14. Female foeticide has its roots in the social thinking which is
G           fundamentally based on certain erroneous notions, egocentric
            traditions, perverted perception of societal norms and obsession
            with ideas which are totally individualistic sans the collective good.
            All involved in female foeticide deliberately forget to realise that
      •c2013) 4 sec 1
H
  DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                               161
                [DIPAK MISRA, CJI.]

      when the foetus of a girl child is destroyed, a woman of the future       A
      is crucified. To put it differently, the present generation invites the
      sufferings on its own and also sows the seeds of suffering for the
      future generation, as in the ultimate eventuate, the sex ratio gets
      affected and leads to manifold social problems. I may hasten to
      add that no awareness campaign can ever be complete unless                B
      there is real focus on the prowess of women and the need for
      women empowerment."
       10. And again:-
        " 16. It is not out of place to state here that the restricted and
constricted thinking with regard to a girl child eventually leads to female     c
foeticide. A foetus in the womb, because she is likely to be born as a girl
child, is not allowed to see the mother earth. In M.C. Mehta v. State of
T.N. 7, a three-Judge Bench, while dealing with the magnitude of the
problem in engagement of the child labour in various hazardous factories
or mines, etc., speaking through Hansaria, J., commenced the judgment
~:                                                                              D
       "I. I am the child.
       All the world waits for my coming.
       All the earth watches with interest to see what I shall become.
       Civilisation hangs in the balance,
       For what I am, the world of tomorrow will be.                            E
       I am the child.
       You hold in your hand my destiny.
       You determine, largely, whether I shall succeed or fail,
       Give me, I pray you, these things that make for happiness.
       Train me, I beg you, that I may be a blessing to the world."
                                                                                F

      The aforesaid lines from Mamie Gene Cole were treated as an
      appeal by this Court and the Bench reproduced the famous line
      from William Wordsworth "child is the father of the man". I have
      reproduced the same to highlight that this Court has laid special
      emphasis on the term "child" as a child feels that the entire world       G
      waits for his/her coming. A female child, as stated earlier, becomes
      a woman. Its life-spark cannot be extinguished in the womb, for
      such an act would certainly bring disaster to the society. On such
'0 996) 6 sec 756
                                                                                H
162            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2017) 12 S.C.R.



A           an act the collective can neither laugh today nor tomorrow. There
            shall be tears and tears all the way because eventually the spirit
            of humanity is comatosed."
      11.   Elaborating the concept of awareness, it has been noted:-
            "33. It is difficult to precisely state how an awareness camp is to
B           be conducted. It will depend upon what kind and strata of people
            are being addressed to. The persons involved in such awareness
            campaign are required to equip themselves with constitutional
            concepts, culture, philosophy, religion, scriptural commands and
            injunctions, the mandate of the Jaw as engrafted under the Act
c           and above all the development of modern science. It needs no
            special emphasis to state that in awareness camps while the
            deterrent facets of Jaw are required to be accentuated upon,
            simultaneously the desirability oflaw to be followed with spiritual
            obeisance, regard being had to the purpose of the Act, has to be
            stressed upon. The seemly synchronisation shall bring the required
D           effect. That apart, documentary films can be shown to highlight
            the need; and instil the idea in the mind of the public at large, for
            when the mind becomes strong, mountains do melt.
            34. The people involved in the awareness campaigns should have
            boldness and courage. There should not be any iota of confusion
E           or perplexity in their thought or action. They should treat it as a
            problem and think that a problem has to be understood in a proper
            manner to afford a solution. They should bear in mind that they
            are required to change the mindset of the people, the grammar of
            the society and unacceptable beliefs inherent in the populace."
 F           12. As the matter was not finally disposed of, it came up on various
      dates and the Court issued further directions and eventually the matter
      stood disposed of by judgment dated 08.11.2016 in Voluntary Health
      Association of Punjab v. Union of India and others 8 (the 2"d): The
      Court reproduced a passage from Ajit Savant Majagvai v. State of
 G    Karnataka 9 which is as follows:-
            "4. It is unfortunate that in an a&e where people are described as
            civilised. crime a&ainst "female" is committed even when the child

      '(2016) 1osec 265
      '(1997) 7 sec 110
H
  DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                             163
                [DIPAK MISRA, CH.]

      is in the womb as the "female" foetus is often destroyed to prevent     A
      the birth of a female child. If that child comes into existence, she
      starts her life as a daughter, then becomes a wife and in due
      co,rse, a mother. She rocks the cradle to rear up her infant,
      bestows all her love on the child and as the child grows in age, she
      gives to the child all that she has in her own personality. She
                                                                              B
      shapes the destiny and character of the child. To be cruel to such
      a creature is unthinkable."
                                                    (emphasis supplied)
       13. The Court referred to the observations made in Ajit Savant
Majagvai (supra) though they were made in a different context because
it had condignly stated the enormity of the problem which has also            c
reflections on female foeticide that has affected the sex ratio. After
recording various directions issued in earlier judgments and scrutinizing
the provisions of the 1994 Act the Court held thus:-
      "40. It needs no special emphasis that a female child is entitled to
      enjoy equal right that a male child is allowed to have. The             D
      constitutional identity of a female child cannot be mortgaged to
      any kind of social or other concept that has developed or is thought
      of. It does not allow any room for any kind of compromise. It only
      permits affirmative steps that are constitutionally postulated. Be
      it clearly stated that when rights are conferred by the Constitution,   E
      it has to be understood that such rights are recognised regard
      being had to their naturalness aud universalism. No one, let it be
      repeated, no one, endows any right to a female child or, for that
      matter, to a woman. The question of any kind of condescension
      or patronisation does not arise."
                                                                              F
       14. Speaking about the constitutional status of women and the
brazed practice of sex identification and female foeticide, the Court
stated:-

      "45. Before parting with the case, let it be stated with certitude
      and without allowing any room for any kind of equivocation or           G
      ambiguity, the perception of any individual or group or organisation
      or system treating a woman with inequity, indignity, inequality or
      any kind of discrimination is constitutionally impermissible. The
      historical perception has to be given a prompt burial. Female
      foeticide is conceived by the society that definitely includes the
                                                                              H
164             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A           parents because of unethical perception of life and nonchalant
            attitude towards law. The society that treats man and woman
            with equal dignity shows the reflections of a progressive and
            civilised society. To think that a woman should think what a man
            or a society wants her to think tantamounts to slaughtering her
            choice, and definitely a humiliating act. When freedom of free
B
            choice is allowed within constitutional and statutory parameters,
            others cannot determine the norms as that would amount to acting
            in derogation oflaw. Decrease in the sex ratio is a sign of colossal
            calamity and it cannot be allowed to happen. Concrete steps have
            to be taken to increase the same so that invited social disasters do
c           not befall on the society. The present generation is expected to be
            responsible to the posterity and not to take such steps to sterilise
            the birth rate in violation oflaw. The societal perception has to be
            metamorphosed having respect to legal postulates."

             15. The purpose ofour referring to the earlier judgments is only to
D     emphasise upon the dignity, right and freedom of choice of a woman. It
      needs no special emphasis to assert that she has the equal constitutiom;l
      status and identity. In Vikas Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh & others 10 ,
      while dealing with honour killing, the Court has ruled:-

             "75 .... Freedom, independence, constitutional identity, individual
E            choice and thought of a woman, be a wife or sister or daughter or
             mother, cannot be allowed to be curtailed definitely not by
             application of physical force or threat or mental cruelty in the
             name of his self-assumed honour. That apart, neither the family
             members nor the members of the collective has any right to assault
F            the boy chosen by the girl. Her individual choice is her self-respect
             and creating dent in it is destroying her honour. And to impose so-
             called brotherly or fatherly honour or class honour by eliminating
             her choice is a crime of extreme brutality, more so, when it is
             done under a guise. It is a vice, condemnable and deplorable
             perception of "honour", comparable to medieval obsessive
G            assertions."

            16. That being the legal position with regard to status of woman
      under the Constitution, we are required to analyse the relevant statutory
      IU(20t6) 9 sec 541
H
  DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                              165
                [DIPAK MISRA, CJI.]

provisions of the 1994 Act. Section 22 of the 1994 Act that occurs in          A
Chapter VII which deals with 'Offences and Penalties' reads thus:-
      "Section 22. Prohibition of advertisement relating to pre-
      conception and pre-natal determination of sex and
      punishment for contravention.-
      (!) No person, organisation, Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic         B
      Laboratory or Genetic Clinic, including Clinic, Laboratory or Centre
      having ultrasound machine or imaging machine or scanner or any
      other technology capable of undertaking determination of sex of
      foetus or sex selection shall issue, publish, distribute, communicate
      or cause to be issued, published, distributed or communicated any        c
      advertisement, in any form, including internet, regarding facilities
      of pre-natal determination of sex or sex selection before conception
      available at such Centre, Laboratory, Clinic or at any other place.
      (2) No person or organisation including Genetic Counselling Centre,
      Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic shall issue, publish, distribute,   D
      communicate or cause to be issued, published, distributed or
      communicated any advertisement in any manner regarding pre-
      natal determination or pre-conception selection of sex by any
      means whatsoever, scientific or otherwise.
      (3) Any person who contravenes the provisions of sub-section ( 1)        E
      or sub-section (2) shall be punishable with imprisonment for a
      term which may extend to three years and with fine w)lich may
      extend to ten thousand rupees.
             Explanation.-For the purposes of this section,
      "advertisement" includes any notice, circular, label, wrapper or
                                                                               F
      any other document including advertisement through internet or
      any other media in electronic or print form and also includes any
      visible representation made by means of any hoarding,
      wall-painting, signal, light, sound, smoke or gas.''
      17. Section 23 deals with offences and penalties. Section 26 deals
                                                                               G
with offences by companies. It is as follows:-
      "Section 26. Offences by companies. - (1) Where any
      offence, punishable under this Act has been committed by a
      company, every person who, at the time the offence was committed

                                                                               H
166            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A           was in charge of, and was responsible to, the company for the
            conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company,
            shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to
            be proceeded against and punished accordingly:
                Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render
B           any such person liable to any punishment, if he proves that the
            offence was committed without his knowledge or that he had
            exercised all due diligence to pr· went the commission of such
            offence.
            (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where
c           any offence punishable under this Act has been committed by a
            company and it is proved that the offence has been committed
            with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to.any neglect
            on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officer of
            the company, such director, manager, secretary or other officer
            shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable
D           to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
            Explanation. -For the purposes of this section, -
            (a) "company" means any body corporate and includes a firm or
            other association of individuals, and
E           (b)"director", in relation to a firm, means a partner in the firm."
             Referring to the said provisions, it is submitted by Mr. Sanjay
      Parikh, learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondents cannot
      engage themselves what is prohibited under the 1994 Act as it is their
      obligation to respect the law in letter and spirit and this Court should
F     direct the respondent-authorities to take stringent action against search
      engines.
            18. At this juncture, it is relevant to state that the Court on
      16.02.2017, after reflecting on the anguish expressed in Voluntary Health
      Association of Punjab (the 2"ct), adverted to various aspects and
G     observed thus:-
            "The present writ petition was filed in 2008 by the petitioner, a
            doctor in the field of Public Health and Nutrition, expressing his
            concern about the modus operandi adopted by the respondent
            Nos.3 to 5 to act in detriment to the fundamental conception of
H
DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                             167
              [DIPAK MISRA, CJI.]

   balancing of sex ratio by entertaining advertisements, either directly   A
   or indirectly or as alleged, in engaging themselves in violation of
   Section 22 of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic
   Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (for brevity,
   'the 1994 Act'). Times without number, this Court has dwelt
   upon how to curb the said malady. In pursuance of our orders             B
   dated 51h July, 2016 and 25 1h July, 2016, an affidavit was filed by
   the competent authority of the Ministry of Electronics and
   Information Technology (MeitY), Government oflndia.
       Be it noted, when the matter was taken up on 191h September,
   2016, it was submitted by Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor
   General that a meeting was held with the three software                  C
   companies, namely, Google India Private Limited, Yahoo ! India
   and Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. and the companies were
   asked to respond to certain questions. For the sake of
   completeness, it is necessary to reproduce the said questions:-
       "(a) Whether respondents feel obligated to comply with the           D
            provisions of PC-PNDT Act, especially section 22 of
            the Act as directed by this Hon'ble Court vide its order
            dated 28.01.2015?
       (b) Whether Respondents are ready to publish a "Warning
           Message" on top of search result, as and when any user           E
           in India submits any "key word searches" in search
           engines, which relates to pre conception and pre natal
           determination of sex or sex selection?
       (c) Whether Respondents are ready to block "auto-complete"
           failure for "key word" searches which relates to pre-            F
           conception and/or pre-natal determination of sex or sex
           selection?
       (d)   Whether the words/phrases relating to pre-conception
             and pre natal determination of sex or sex selection to be
             provided and regularly updated by the Government for           G
             the 'key word search' or shall it be the onus of the
             Respondents providing search engine facilities?
       (e) Whether it is feasible for the Respondents to place this
           Hon 'ble Court order dated 28.01.2015 on their respective
                                                                            H
168     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                           [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A              Home Page(s), instead of placing them on Terms of
               Service (TOS) pages?
         (f)    What is the suggested timeline to incorporate "Warning
               Message", blocking of the "auto-complete" feature for
               key word search & related terms etc. relating to pre-
B              conception and pre-natal determination of sex or sex
               selection?
         (g)    Any other information as Respondents would like to
               share?"
         The responses to those questions were given by the respondent
c     Nos.3 to 5 and, thereafter, delving into the submissions which
      were flSSiduously canvassed by the learned counsel for the
      respondents, the following order was passed:-
         "Explaining the same, it is submitted by the learned Solicitor
         General that all the three Companies are bound to develop a
D        technique so that, the moment any advertisement or search is
         introduced into the system, that will not be projected or seen
         by adopting the method of "auto block". To clarify, if any
         person tries to avail the corridors of these companies, this devise
         shall be adopted so that no one can enter/see the said
E        advertisement or message or anything that is prohibited under
         the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques
         (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (for short, 'the Act'),
         specifically under Section 22 of the said Act.
                 Mr. Sanjay Parikh, learned counsel for the petitioner
         would contend that the Union oflndia should have taken further
 F
         steps to see that the law of the country is totally obeyed by
         these three Companies, inasmuch as the commitment given by
         them or the steps taken by the Union oflndia are not adequate.
         He has pointed out from the affidavit filed by the petitioner
         that there are agencies which are still publishing advertisements
G        from which it can be deciphered about the genderof the foetus.
         Learned counsel would submit that Section 22 of the Act has
         to be read along with the other provisions of the Act and it
         should be conferred an expansive meaning and should not be
         narrowly construed as has been done by the respondents.
H
DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                            169
              [DIPAK MISRA, CJI.]

           Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor General at this             A
     juncture would submit that he has been apprised today only
     about the "proposed list of words" in respect of which when
     commands are given, there will be "auto block" with a warning
     and nothing would be reflected in the internet, as it is prohibited
     in India. We think it appropriate to reproduce the said
                                                                           B
     "proposed list of words". It reads as under:-
                     "Proposed List of Words
          Gender selection
          Gender selection Kits
          Gender selection service                                         c
          Gender selection clinics
          Gender selection technique
          Prenatal sex selection
          Prenatal sex selection kits
          Prenatal sex selection service
          Prenatal sex selection clinics                                   D
          Prenatal sex selection technique
          Prenatal sex determination
          Prenatal sex determination kits
          Prenatal sex determination service
          Prenatal sex determination clinics
                                                                           E
          prenatal sex determination technique
          Baby gender selection
          Baby gender selection kits
          Baby gender selection service
          Baby gender selection clinics
          Baby gender selection technique                                  F
          Prenatal diagnostic tests for selection of sex before or
          after conception
          Prenatal conception test
          Prenatal diagnostic
          Prenatal foetoscopy for sex selection
                                                                           G
          Prenatal ultrasonography for sex selection
          Sex selection procedure
          Sex selection technique
          Sex selection test
          Sex selection administration
                                                                           H
170           · SUPREME COURT REPORTS                        [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A                   Sex selection prescription
                    Sex selection services
                    Sex selection management
                    Sex selection process
                    Sex selection conduct
                    Prenatal image scanning for sex selection
B
                    Prenatal diagnostic procedure for sex selection
                    Sex determination using scanner
                    Sex determination using machines
                    Sex determination using equipment
                    Scientific sex determination and sex selection
c                   Gender test
                    Early Gender Test"
                      At this juncture, Mr. C.A. Sundaram, Mr. K.V.
            Vishwanathan, learned senior counsel, Mr. Anupam Lal Das,
            learned counsel appearing for Google India, Microsoft Corporation
D           (I) Pvt. Ltd. and Yahoo India, rnspectively, have submitted that
            apart from the aforesaid words, if anyone, taking recourse to any
            kind of ingenuity, feed certain words and something that is
            prohibited under the Act comes into existence, the "principle of
            auto block" shall be immediately applied and it shall not be shown.
            The learned counsel appearing for the search engines/
E           intermeJi,;r:es have submitted that they can only do this when it is
            brought to their notice. In our considered opinion, they are under
            obligation to see that the "doctrine of auto block" is applied within
            a reasonable period of time. It is difficult to accept the submission
            that once it is brought to their notice, they will do the needful. It
F           need not be over emphasized that it has to be an in-house
            procedure/method to be introduced by the Companies, and we so
            direct:••-
            19. On the basis of the order passed, an affidavit was filed by the
      Union of India which reflected its understanding of Section 22 of the
      1994Act. Considering the same, on 16.11.2016, the following order was
G
      passed:-
            "The section 22 and the explanation appended to it is very wide
            and does no.t confine only to commercial advertisements. The
            intention oflaw is to prevent any message/communication which
            results in determination/selection of sex by any means what so
H
  DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                  171
                [DIPAK MISRA, CJI.]

      ever scientific or otherwise. The different ways in which the                A
      conimunication /messages are given by the internet/search engine
      which promote or tend to promote sex selection are prohibited
      under Section 22. The search engines should devise their own
      methods to stop the offending messages/ advertisements/
      communication and if the compliance in accordance with law is
                                                                                   B
      not done Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology
      (MeitY), shall take action as they have already said in their
      affidavits dated 15.10.2015 & 08.08.2016. The Ministry of Health
      and family Welfare is concerned about the falling Child Sex Ratio
      anJ 1., taking all possible actions to ensure that the provisions of
      PC & PNDT Act are strictly implemented."                                     c
      20. Thereafter the matter was heard at some length and pending
the debate, the Court directed as follows:-
      "At this stage, pending that debate, in addition to the earlier directions
      passed by this Court, we direct that the Union of India shall
      constitute a "Nodal Agency" and give due advertisement in                    D
      television, newspapers and radio by stating that it has been created
      in pursuance of the order of this Court and anyone who comes
      across anything that has the nature of an advertisement or any
      impact in identifying a boy or a girl in any method, manner or
      mode by any search engine shall be brought to its notice. Once it            E
      is brought to the notice of the Nodal Agency, it shall intimate the
      concerned search engine or the corridor provider immediately and
      after receipt of the same, the search engines are obliged to delete
      it within thirty-six hours and intimate the Nodal Agency. Needless
      to say, this is an interim arrangement pending the discussion which
      we have noted herein-before. The Nodal Agency shall put the                  F
      ultimate action taken by the search engine on its website."
          In pursuance of the said order, the Union oflndia has filed an
      affidavit of the Joint Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family
      Welfare, Government of India. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the said
      affidavit read as follows:-                                                  G

         "3. In compliance of the Court's directive, this Ministry has
         set-up a single point contact for the Nodal Agency to receive
         the complaints on violation of Section 22 of PC & PNDT Act,
         1994. Details of the Nodal Agency are as under:-
                                                                                   H
172      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                           [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A        (i) Contact e-mail address               for    nodal     agency:
         v.cpndtcomv.laints@nihfw.org
         (ii) Nodal Officer: Dr. Chetan Chouhan, Senior Medical
         Officer
         (iii) E-mail id and Mobile number of Nodal Officer:
B        chetanchoohan@nihfw.org. 9818305703
         (iv)   Alternative Nodal Officer and contact details:
                Dr. Geetanjaly Singh,
                Senior Medical Officer
                E-mail: geetanjaly@nihfw.org
c               Mobile No.9968545794
         4. That, further in compliance of dir.:cdcrs, for advertising in
         television, newspaper and radio appropriate steps are being
         undertaken and same shall be complied with at the earliest."

D        In view of the aforesaid affidavit, we direct the Union oflndia
      to comply with the paragraph 4 within a week hence. It shall be
      clearly mentioned that it is being done in pursuance of the ordt;·
      passed by this Court.

         At this juncture, Mr. Sanjay Parikh, learned counsel appearing
E     for thP. petitioner has drawn our attention to the additional affidavit
      filed on behalf of the respondent No.3, especially to paragraph
      6(b) and (c). They read as follows:-

      "6(b) There are innumerable activities banned by law, e.g. using a
      bomb to kill people, murder, rape, prostitution, pornography etc.,
F     nevertheless, there is no dearth of information available under
      each of these heads in both the offline and online world. Just
      because a particular ;i~tivity is morally repugnant, illegal or
      prohibited under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and other
      applicable laws, does not mean that everyone in the world is
      disentitled from having any form ofinformation about the subject.
G
         (c) This would be in complete violation of Article 19( 1)(a) of
         the Constitution oflndia, which firstly includes the right to know,
         secondly, right to receive and thirdly, right to access the
         information or any content etc."
H
DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                             173
              [DIPAK MISRA, CJI.]

        Refuting the paragraph 6(b), learned Solicitor General has          A
   submitted that he will file a response to the same. His instant
   reaction was that the said paragraph contravenes the letter and
   spirit of Section 22 of the 1994Act. Additionally, it is contended
   by him that paragraph 6(b) is not saved by Article 19(1 )(a) of the
   Constitution of India as asserted in paragraph (c ). At this juncture,   B
   Ms. Ruby Ahuja, learned counsel appearing for the respondent
   No.3 has submitted that the said respondent has no intention to
   disrespect or disobey or even remotely think of contravening any
   law(s) of this country and she undertakes to file a clarificatory
   affidavit within three weeks.
         It is necessary to take note of another submission advanced        c
   by Mr. Parikh, learned counsel with the assistance of Ms. Ninni
   Susan Thomas, learned counsel for the petitioner. It is urged by
   him that despite the order passed on l 9'h September, 2016, that
   the respondent Nos.3 to 5 shall undertake the exercise of principle
   of"auto block", the literature and write-ups that would tempt the        D
   people to go for male child which ultimately lead to reduction of
   sex ratio, is still being shnwn in certain websites. The said websites
   were shown to Mr. K.V. Viswanathan, Mr. Anupam Lal Das and
   Ms. Ruby Ahuja. The learned counsel appearing for the
   respondents have submitted that they will verify the same and the
   context. Additionally, it is canvassed by Mr. Vishwanathan with          E
   immense vehemence that it does not come within the proposed
   list of words that find mention in the order dated l 9'h September,
   2016, and, therefore, it cannot be construed as a violation. Be
   that as it may.
        We reiterate our direction dated 191h September, 2016, and          F
   further add that the respondent Nos.3 to 5 shall appoint their "In-
   House Expert Body" which shall take steps to see that if any
   words or any key words that can be shown in the internet which
   has the potentiality to go counter to Section 22 of the 1994 Act,
   should be deleted forthwith.                                             G
         Presently, we shall advert to the paragraphs 3 and 4 of the
   affidavit of the Union oflndia which we have reproduced herein-
   above. As the Nodal Agency has already been constituted, it will
   be open to the petitioner or any person that the Nodal Agency
                                                                            H
174            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                           [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A           shall take it up and intimate the respondent Nos.3 to 5 so that they
            will do the needful. That apart, the "In-House Expert Body" that
            is directed to be constituted, if not already constituted, shall on its
            own understanding delete anything that violates the letter and spirit
            of language of Section 22 of the 1994 Act and, in case there is
            any doubt, they can enter into a communication with the Nodal
B
            Agency appointed by the Union oflndia and, thereafter, they will
            be guided by the suggestion of the Nodal Agency of the Union of
            India. Be it clarified, the present order is passed so that the
            respondent Nos.3 to 5 become responsive to the Indian law.
               Let the matter be listed on 11'" April, 2017, for further hearing."
c
             21. On 13.04.2017 taking note of the submissions of the learned
      counsel for the parties and Section 22 of the 1994 Act, the Court passed
      the following order:-
                "Mr. Parekh has drawn our attention to certain search results.
D           One such result is 'Medical Tourism In India'. It is pointed out by
            Mr. Parekh that it deals with 'gender determination' in India which
            is prohibited by the aforesaid provision.
                At this juncture, Mr. Salve, Dr. Singh vi and Mr. Das, learned
            counsel for the respondents submitted that the key words are
E           'Medical Tourism In India' which do not offend the provision. It
            is the 'Originator' of the blog who has used the offensive words
            in the contents of the website and in such a situation the Nodal
            Officer of the Union of India can block the website as per the
            Act.
                Be it noted, in pursuance of the order passed by this Court,
 F
            the respondents have appointe.d their own 'In-house' experts. It
            is accepted by the learned counsel for the respondents that they
            have never indulged in any kind of advertisement as contemplated
            under Section. 22 of the Act and nor do they have any kind of
            intention to cause any violation of the said mandate. It is further
G           accepted by them that they will not sponsor any advertisement as
            provided under Section 22 of the Act. Learned counsel for the
            respondents would contend, and rightly, that they do not intend to
            take an adversarial position with the petitioner but on the contrary
            to play a participative and co-operative role so that the law made
H
 DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                             175
               [DIPAK MISRA, CJ!.]

      by the Parliament of India to control sex selection and to enhance     A
      the sex ratio is respected. It is further accepted by them that if
      the Nodal Officer of the Union oflndia communicates to any of
      the respondents with regard to any offensive material that
      contravenes Section 22, they will block it.
           Needless to say, the intimation has to be given to the            B
      respondents. The Nodal Officers appointed in the States under
      the Act are also entitled to enter into communication with the
      respondents for which they have no objection. The action taken
      report, as further acceded to, shall be sent to the Nodal Officer.
      Be it stated, the names of the Nodal Officers have been mentioned
      in the affidavit filed by the Union oflndia dated 11.11.2016.
                                                                             c
            At this juncture, it is necessary to state that volumes of
      literature under various heads come within the zone of the internet
      and in this virtual world the idea what is extremely significant is
      'only connect'. Therefore, this Court has recorded the concession
      of the respondents so that the sanctity of the Act is maintained
      and there is no grievance on any score or any count by anyone
      that his curiosity fo1 i1is search for anything is not met with and
      scuttled. To elaborate, if somebody intends to search for 'Medical
      Tourism In India' is entitled to search as long as the content does
      not frustrate or defeat the restriction postulated under Section 22    E
      of the Act. It is made clear that there is no need on the part of
      anyone to infer that it creates any kind of curtailment in his right
      to access information, knowledge and wisdom and his freedom of
      expression. What is stayed is only with regard to violation of
      Section 22 of the Act. We may further add that freedom of
      expression included right to be informed and right to know and         F
      feeling of protection of expansive connectivity.
            As agreed to by learned counsel for the parties, the let the
      matter be listed on 5.9 .2017 so that the outcome of this acceptance
      will be plain as day."
                                                                             G
       22. The matter was called for hearing today, that is, 13.12.2017 ..
It has been submitted by Mr. Parikh, learned counsel for the petitioner,
that despite the order passed by this Court, the Nodal Agency has not
been effective to stop the offending material being displayed or purveyed
on the internet. Learned counsel squarely make Google India, Yahoo !
                                                                             H
176            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A     India and Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. responsible for the same.
      According to Mr. Parikh, these search engines have the potentiality to
      take necessary action to remove the offending material, but they
      deliberately do not remove it, by artificially constraining the word
      "content". He has laid immense stress on the "auto-block principle"
      and the concept of "key words" and associated possibilities.
B
             23. The said submissions are refuted by Dr. Abhishek Manu
      Singhvi and Mr. K.V. Vishwanathan, learned senior counsel appearing
      for Google India and Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. respectively.
      Mr. Anupam Lal Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Yahoo!
      India, would submit that "content" can only be removed, once it is pointed
c     out by the Nodal Agency and further there are generators who can
      make permutations and combinations, which will be very difficult on the
      part of the search engine to remove.
            24. At this juncture, Mr. Parikh has drawn our attention to the
      paragraphs 12, 13, 14 and 19 oftheAnnexure-C to the affidavit filed on
D     behalf of the petitioner. They are extracted below:-
            "12. Google also has automated systems that analyze the tens of
            millions of new ads created by advertisers every day. True and
            accurate copies of publicly available webpages describing Google's
            automated review systems, as they appeared as of December I 0,
E           2014, at http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/04/inside-vicw-on-
            ads-rev iew.html and http://adwords. blogspot.com/2013/04/a-
            hcalthy-advcrtising-ccosystcm.html are attached hereto as Exhibits
            6 and 7, respectively; see also Exhibit 3.
            13. Google also relics on its users and on other advertisers to
F           report improper advertisements. The process for users and other
            advertisers to report improper advertisements is accessible through
            a publicly available webpage. A true and accurate copy of that
            webpage, as it appeared as of December 10, 2014 at https://
            support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/608450?rd =l, is
G           attached hereto as Exhibit 8.
            14. In 2014, Google has' already disapproved over 428 million
            advertisements (most of which never generated a single
            impression), it has prevented ads from linking to over one million
            websites, and it has suspended or terminated over 900,000
                                        ;

H
  DR. SABU MATHEW GEORGE v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                            177
                [DIPAK MISRA, CJI.]

      advertiser accounts for violations of Google's AdWrods policies.       A
      The vast majority of these actions were taken as a result of
      Google's proactive systems rather than as a result of outside
      complaints.
      19. In 2014 alone, Google disapproved over seven million rogue
      pharmacy ads (that is, advertisers lacking appropriate accreditation   B
      to run pharmacy ads) and it disabled over 30,000 advertiser
      websites for violating Google's health care and medicines policies.
      Most of these ads were removed before they generated any ad
      impressions. In 2013, Google disapproved over 4.5 million rogue
      pharmacy ads for violating Google's healthcare and medicines
      policies."
                                                                             c
       25. Ms. Ruby Ahuja, learned counsel assisting Dr. Abhishek Manu
Singhvi, learned senior counsel, appearing for the Google India would
submit that certain paragraphs which have been put forth in the affidavit
filed by Mr. Sanjay Parikh are not relevant as they do not relate to paid
advertisements. Whether those paragraphs are relevant or not, we are         D
directing the respondents to find out a solution. We make it clear that
we have not expressed any opinion on the nature of the solution, which
the experts of the above mentioned entities shall find and implement.
        26. We have been apprised by Ms. Pinky Anand, learned Additional
Solicitor General appearing for the Union oflndia that pursuant to the       E
directions of this Court, a Nodal Agency has already been constituted
and it is working in right earnest and whenever it receives any complaint,
it intimates the search engine and contents are removed.
      27. Mr. Parikh would submit that there are various other ways by
which contents can be removed so that the impact would become evident.       F

       28. Weighing the rivalised submissions at the Bar, we direct the
Nodal Agency and the Expert Committee to hold a meeting and have
the assistance of Mr. Sanjay Parikh and his team so that there can be a
holistic understanding and approach to the problem. The Nodal Agency
and the Expert Committee shall also call upon the representatives of         G
Google India, Yahoo ! India and Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd.,
who are directed to appear before the Committee and offer their
suggestions. There has to be a constructive and collective approach to
arrive at a solution together with the Expert Committee and the search
                                                                             H
178                SUPREME COURT REPORTS                         [2017] 12 S.C.R.



A     engine owners. They are obliged under law to find solutions if something
      gets projected in contravention of the 1994 Act. The effective solution
      is the warrant of the obtaining situation. We are using the word "solution",
      keeping in view our earlier orders and the suggestions given by the
      competent authority of the Union oflndia. The duty of all concerned is
      to see that the mandate of the 1994 Act is scrupulously followed. Keeping
B
      the aforesaid in view, a meeting shall be held within six weeks hence.
      All the suggestions or possibilities must be stated in writing before the
      Committee so that appropriate and properly informed measures are taken.
             29. We are sure that the Union oflndia and its Committee will be
      in a position to take appropriate steps so that the mandate of the 1994
c     Act is not violated and the falling sex ratio in the country, as has been
      noted in Centre for Enquiry into Health & Allied Themes
      (CE HAT), Voluntary Health Association of Punjab (the
      1")and Voluntary Health Association of Punjab (the 2"d), does not
      remain a haunting problem.
D           30. We are constrained to say so as many are guided by
      inappropriate exposure to the internet. The respondents have a rcle to
      control it and if any concrete suggestion is given by the petitioner, the
      same shall be incorporated. We command Google India, Yahoo 1 India
      and Microsoft Corporation (I) Pvt. Ltd. to cooperate and give their point
E     of view for the purpos·e of a satisfactory solution instead of taking a
      contesting stand before the Expert Committee.
              31. With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition stands dispost~
      of. If there will be any further grievance, liberty is granted to the petitioner
      to file a fresh writ petition. There shall be no order as to costs.
F


      Nidhi Jain                                                   Petition disposed of.