Flipkart Internet Private Ltd. v. State of NCT of Delhi
(2022) 293 DLT 172
In the High of Delhi
WP(Crl) 1376/2020
Before Justice Asha Menon
Decided on August 17, 2022

Relevancy of the Case: Quashing of an FIR registered against Flipkart for allowing the unauthorised sale of the complainant’s products

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 2, 79)
• The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules, 2011 (Rule 3)
• The Copyright Act, 1957 (Section 63)
• The Trade Marks Act, 1999 (Section 103, 104)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The second respondent is the Managing Director of Sanash Impex Pvt. Ltd. Sanash Impex has the absolute and exclusive right to sell DC DERMACOL cosmetic products in India, offline and online.
• The second respondent has accused the petitioner of cheating and illegally selling DC DERMACOL products on its portal with unauthorised sellers.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The petitioner’s counsel argued it has safe harbour protection under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Further, it had no obligation to remove products from its materials without a court order. Moreover, Flipkart published a policy dictating materials that could not be posted. Therefore, the platform adhered to due diligence requirements.
• The respondent’s counsel argued that the petitioner could not act whimsically since it removed 4 out of 10 product listings on its platform without a court order. Further, the petitioner acquired actual knowledge through 33 emails sent by the second respondent. Choosing not to remedy the situation is non-adherence to due diligence.

Opinion of the Bench

• Through its Terms of Use, the petitioner has complied with Rule 3(2) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules, 2011.
• The FIR only names the petitioner. It does not name any other site or entity allegedly selling fake or unauthorised products.
• Registering an FIR against an intermediary would lead to a miscarriage of justice.

Final Decision

• The court allowed the present petition and quashed the FIR and any proceedings arising thereof qua the petitioner.