Bombay High Court
HARSHAD HIRU NAIKversusUNION OF INDIA THR MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS AND 2 ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed of
Holding
The Court directs the petitioner to file an appeal before the Grievance Appellate Committee within ten days and orders preservation of the petitioner’s digital assets during the appeal and for two weeks after the appellate order.
Summary
Harshad Hiru Naik filed a writ petition challenging actions of the Union of India and others. Respondent No.3 replied on 4 September 2026, prompting the Court to direct the petitioner to invoke the remedy under Rule 3A of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 by filing an appeal before the Grievance Appellate Committee within ten days. The Court ordered that the digital assets of the petitioner be preserved during the pendency of the appeal and for two weeks after the appellate order. The appeal, if filed, must be decided preferably within six weeks of receipt. The petition was thereafter disposed in these terms.
Issues considered
- What remedy is available to the petitioner under Rule 3A of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021?
- Whether the order preserving the petitioner’s digital assets should continue pending the appeal and for a specified period thereafter?
Legislation cited
- Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 — s. Rule 3A
Subjects
- Information Technology
- Intermediary Guidelines
- Digital Assets
- Writ Petition
- Procedural Order
- Appeal
- Preservation
Judgment
77 WP 1141 2026
Meena
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
WRIT PETITION NO.1141 OF 2026
HARSHAD HIRU NAIK ... PETITIONER
Versus
UNION OF INDIA THR MINISTRY OF
HOME AFFAIRS AND 2 ORS ... RESPONDENTS
Mr. Jatin Ramaiya, Advocate with Mr. Omkar Parab, Advocate
(through VC) for the Petitioner.
Mr. Pravin Faldessai, Central Government Standing Counsel
with Mr. Anand Shirodkar and Ms. Swizel Falcao, Advocates for
the Respondent No.1.
Ms. Amee Rana (through VC) with Mr. Vishesh Sharma, Ms.
Tanvi Raina and Mr. Parikshit Sawant, Advocates for
Respondent No.3.
CORAM:- VALMIKI MENEZES &
AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, JJ.
DATED :- 8th September, 2026
P..C:
1. The Respondent No.3, through its Grievance Officer, has
responded to the Petitioner's representation by communication
dated 04.09.2026. Considering that there is now a response, the
remedy available to the Petitioner under Rule 3A of the
Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital
Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 is to file an appeal before
Respondent No.2 i.e. the Grievance Appellate Committee. The
Petitioner submits that he would file an appeal within 10 days from
today; if such appeal is filed, the Grievance Appellate Committee -
Page 1 of 2
8th September, 2026
77 WP 1141 2026
Respondent No.2 shall consider the appeal and reply of the
Respondent No.3, if any, and dispose of the appeal, preferably
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the appeal.
2. During the pendency of such appeal, if filed, the statement
made by Respondent No.3 as recorded in our order of 27.08.2026
that the digital assets of the Petitioner would be preserved shall
continue during the pendency of the appeal and continue in
operation till 2 weeks after the appellate order is passed.
3. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
AMIT S. JAMSANDEKAR, J. VALMIKI MENEZES, J.
Signed by: MEENA VISHAL BHOIR
Designation: Private Secretary
Page 2 of 2
Date: 09/09/2026 18:12:14
8th September, 2026
Checking your session…