The Karnataka High Court on April 29 ordered the Central government authorities to take action to block the operation of ProtonMail in India, Bar and Bench reported.
The petitioner argued that the platform's high level of user anonymity posed a serious risk, as it hindered law enforcement efforts.
The Karnataka High Court on April 29 ordered the Central government authorities to take action to block the operation of ProtonMail in India, Bar and Bench reported.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court has directed central authorities to block access to ProtonMail in India, following a petition by M Moser Design Associates India Pvt. Ltd.
The company approached the court after vulgar and defamatory emails targeting one of its employees were sent via Proton Mail to colleagues and clients. The petitioner argued that the platform's high level of user anonymity posed a serious risk, as it hindered law enforcement efforts.
Although a police complaint was filed, the petitioner라이브 바카라 counsel, advocate Jatin Sehgal, told the court that ProtonMail had refused to share details about the sender, making a proper investigation unlikely.
In response, the court issued a writ of mandamus to central government authorities—Respondents 2, 4, and 5—ordering them to initiate proceedings under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2008, along with Rule 10 of the 2009 IT Blocking Rules, to block ProtonMail in India, considering the concerns raised in the case.
During proceedings in the Karnataka High Court, advocate Jatin Sehgal, representing M Moser Design Associates India Pvt. Ltd., argued that ProtonMail poses a broader national security threat beyond the petitioner라이브 바카라 individual case. He submitted that Proton Mail has removed its servers from India and was recently used to send bomb threats to schools across the country.
“It라이브 바카라 not just my client who has suffered—this is a national threat,” Sehgal told the Court.
He further alleged that ProtonMail actively instructs users on its website how to evade monitoring by Indian authorities. The platform allows users to create an account in just 30 seconds, without any identity verification, he said, emphasizing the challenges it presents to law enforcement.
The petitioner also sought directions to compel Indian authorities to engage with their Swiss counterparts—since ProtonMail is based in Switzerland—to secure information necessary for investigating the offensive emails.
In response, the Court ordered the immediate blocking of the URLs linked to the defamatory content. “Until the Government of India concludes proceedings to block Proton Mail, the offending URLs mentioned in the petition shall be blocked forthwith,” the Court directed.
Representing the Central Government, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aravind Kamath clarified that the Centre라이브 바카라 role in cross-border investigation is limited. He noted that any formal request to Swiss authorities must be initiated through judicial channels.
“We have a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) with Switzerland. Since a complaint has already been filed, it is for the investigating officer and the criminal court to initiate the process. Ministries like the MHA or MeitY cannot act independently in this matter,” Kamath explained.
Regarding the broader issue of blocking ProtonMail in India, the ASG informed the Court that he would review recent observations made by the Delhi High Court concerning the platform라이브 바카라 operations.