This case is significant in India as it brought the concept of the "Right to be Forgotten" into the legal discourse. The petitioner, Dharamraj Bhanushankar Dave, sought the removal of a criminal judgment against him from online platforms like Google and Indian Kanoon.

Key Issues:

• Right to be Forgotten: The petitioner argued that once acquitted, individuals have the right to have their past legal troubles erased from the internet.
• Public Right to Information: This right often clashes with individual privacy rights. In this case, the judgment was a public document, raising questions about its accessibility.
• Judicial Discretion: The court had to balance the petitioner's right to privacy with the public's right to access information.

Court's Decision:
The court acknowledged the concept of the "Right to be Forgotten" but emphasized that it's not absolute. While it ordered the removal of the judgment from search engine results, it clarified that the judgment itself would remain accessible as a public court record.

Significance:
This case is a landmark in India's evolving understanding of digital rights and privacy. It highlights the challenges of balancing individual privacy with the principles of transparency and accountability in the digital age.