Online content: Delhi HC refuses relief to Yahoo

Yahoo’s counsel Arvind Nigam argued that the company’s name did not figure in the complaint filed in the trial court and hence,the High Court should grant an interim stay on the proceedings.

The court,however,decided to adjourn the case after Vinay Rai,the complainant,said he had not received a copy of the petition.

On January 20,the High Court had issued a notice to the Delhi Police on Yahoo’s petition challenging the summons issued to it by the trial court,and ordered that this plea be heard separately. In its petition,Yahoo had argued that the complaint as well as the magistrate’s order dealt with the alleged objectionable material retrieved from websites like Zombie,Youtube,Orkut,Facebook,and Blogspot,but not Yahoo.

“I am not a social networking site,like other accused in the case. I only provide email and chat services,” Nigam told the court. “Moreover,no objectionable material has been attributed to me,and so my case is different from others.”

The Centre had earlier informed the court that there was “sufficient material to proceed against the 21 websites for alleged offences of promoting enmity between classes and causing prejudice to national integration”.