Courts cannot remain mute spectators, Karnataka HC says in order to ban Proton Mail over digital sexual abuse
The Karnataka High Court, which ordered the Union government to block Proton Mail in India last month, released the full written version of its judgement on Thursday (May 29, 2025), in which it observed that courts could not remain 'mute spectators' when such a platform became a 'menace'. Its order was in response to a complaint that Proton had refused to help identify users sexually harassing a woman via the Swiss end-to-end encrypted email platform.
Despite the April 29 order, Proton Mail is still easily accessible in most of India. Karan Saini, a security researcher who has developed a tool to detect website blocking by various internet service providers, told The Hindu that as of Thursday (May 29, 2025), most ISPs did not seem to be blocking Proton Mail.
The text of the full judgement shows that K. Arvind Kamath, the Additional Solicitor General of India who represented the Union government in the case, did not push back on the court's right to block Proton Mail. However, he said that such orders 'require procedure to be followed and the balance of bilateral relations between the two countries.' Swiss authorities had reportedly engaged with the Union government on Proton's behalf after a complaint last year.
The High Court's order directed the Union government to 'initiate proceedings in terms of Section 69A of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 r/w Rule 10 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking of Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 to block Proton Mail... Till such proceedings are taken up by the Government of India, the offending Uniform Resource Locator - URLs that are indicated in the petition shall be blocked forthwith.'
'Undermines women's privacy, integrity'
The order came in response to a petition filed by M Moser Design Associates, a Bengaluru-based firm which said that it had received multiple emails from an anonymous Proton Mail account targeting a senior executive at the firm. The judgement described the first email from the anonymous account as containing 'obscene, abusive, vulgar, sexually coloured, derogatory and defamatory remarks in respect of one of the female senior personnel' of the company.
While the email ID was taken down after M Moser Design complained to Proton, another account sent a similarly obscene email within the same week. Even following formal complaints to the police, Proton Mail did not provide any details that could lead to the identification of the individual or individuals behind the account. An email by the platform reproduced in the order said that Proton would only be able to act on a formal law enforcement request from India.
'Courts cannot remain mute spectators when faced with such menace which undermines privacy and integrity of women in particular,' the order said.
Swiss intervention
Proton AG, which runs the email platform, said in a post last year that Swiss authorities had interceded on its behalf after a formal recommendation by Tamil Nadu police to block Proton Mail in India. This year too, Proton Mail updated that blog post after the High Court pronounced its judgement, saying that Swiss authorities were engaging the Indian government in the matter.
However, Marc Løebekken, Head of Legal at Proton, told The Hindu that this was an erroneous statement, as the update was referring to discussions Swiss representatives had with India last year. The blog was eventually amended. Mr. Løebekken told The Hindu on May 10 that the company was awaiting the publication of the court order in full.
A Proton spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment after the court order was released. The company was not represented in the Karnataka High Court.
Jurisdiction hurdles
'The investigation, though earnest, in endeavour, faltered against the bulwark of international jurisdiction, and encryption,' the court said. 'The State machinery hamstrung, by the absence of enforceable cooperation from Proton AG and the lack of a server within its jurisdiction, submitted its helplessness, in the form of a report.'
Ordering the blocking, the court said that Proton 'undoubtedly falls short of the duties prescribed under Indian Law,' adding that the firm's 'inaction and opacity strike at the heart of digital accountability and embolden the malicious.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
25 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Jubilant gets $600 mn boost from Goldman for Coca-Cola India stake buy
By Megawati Wijaya and PR Sanjai Goldman Sachs Asset Management has provided $600 million to partially fund the equity investment needed by Indian conglomerate Jubilant Bhartia Group for its purchase of a 40 per cent stake in The Coca-Cola Co.'s bottling unit in India, according to people familiar with the matter. Goldman Sachs Asset Management's hybrid fund financed this equity portion by subscribing to the convertible preference shares issued by the group, said the people, who asked not to be named discussing a private matter. The fund — which is part of the investment bank's private credit strategy — sits between traditional debt and equity, and is usually longer in tenure. Convertible preference shares is one of the many ways companies can raise capital to fund their operations and expansion. They can choose to do so because it enables them to avoid taking on debt, while limiting the potential dilution of selling additional common stock. Goldman Sachs and Jubilant Bhartia declined to comment. Coca-Cola in December announced that Jubilant Bhartia will acquire a minority stake in Hindustan Coca-Cola Holdings Pvt., the parent company of the soft drink maker's largest bottler in India called Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Pvt. The total acquisition cost is $1.5 billion, the people said. The pizza-to-pharmaceuticals conglomerate will fund the remaining $900 million required for the acquisition with $600 million of equity and $300 million in debt, the people added. Two subsidiaries of the group — Jubilant BevCo and Jubilant Beverages — recently issued rupee-denominated bonds totaling $658 million-equivalent to fund the deal, Bloomberg News reported. Jubilant Bhartia's purchase of a stake in the beverage giant joins a series of foreign firms looking to divest part of their shareholding in local arms. In December, the Indian unit of South Korea-based LG Electronics Inc. filed for an initial public offering, seeking to tap investors in the South Asian country's booming market. Earlier last year, British American Tobacco Plc raised $2 billion selling shares in its Indian partner.
Indian Express
34 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trump asks supreme court to halt court order over education department
The Trump administration on Friday urged the Supreme Court to block a lower court ruling that reinstated nearly 1,400 Education Department employees who were dismissed under President Donald Trump's controversial plan to dismantle the agency. In an emergency appeal, the Justice Department said US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston overstepped his authority when he issued a preliminary injunction last month at the request of several Democratic-led states, school districts, and teachers' unions. The Boston-based First US Circuit Court of Appeals had already rejected the administration's request to pause the injunction while the appeals process played out. The lower court order required the government not only to reverse the mass layoffs but also to halt broader efforts to dissolve the department — one of Trump's headline campaign promises. In March, Trump signed an executive order to eliminate the Department of Education, triggering immediate backlash from opponents who called it a direct attack on public education. Critics have noted that while the Education Department does not directly operate schools, it plays a critical role in dispersing federal funds, enforcing civil rights laws such as Title IX, and supporting low-income students, students with disabilities, and higher education institutions.
Indian Express
34 minutes ago
- Indian Express
US Supreme Court reverses order which provided relief to Government of India in dispute over $1.2 billion award for failed 2005 Devas-Antrix satellite deal
In a setback for the Government of India and Antrix Corporation – a commercial arm of the Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) – the US Supreme Court has rolled back a reprieve given in 2023 by a US appeals court in a legal battle over a compensation claim of $1.2 billion by start-up firm Devas Multimedia for a failed satellite deal from the year 2005. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had ruled on August 1, 2023, that Antrix Corp, as an alter ego of India, must have some amount of business in the US to be subjected to the jurisdiction of US courts under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of the US. The August 2023 order of the appeals court was expected to end efforts by Devas Multimedia to enforce in the United States a $1.2 billion compensation award made by an arbitration tribunal of the International Chamber of Commerce on September 14, 2015. The award had been confirmed by the US court for the Western District of Washington on October 27, 2020. The US Supreme Court, in an order dated June 5, following a plea by Devas Multimedia against the August 2023 appeals court order, has ruled that the appeals court had erred in its ruling that a firm must have some minimum business in the US for it to be liable to be sued in US courts. The US Supreme Court, which reserved its orders in the matter on March 3, 2025, has stated in its order on Thursday that US courts have jurisdiction over foreign entities 'when an immunity exception applies and service is proper'. 'The FSIA does not require proof of 'minimum contacts' over and above the contacts already required by the Act's enumerated exceptions to foreign sovereign immunity,' the US Supreme Court has ruled while reversing the 2023 order of the appeals court. The US SC has referred the case back to the Ninth Circuit for fresh consideration of the matter. 'Antrix's alternative arguments – that the Fifth Amendment itself requires a showing of minimum contacts, that the claims at issue do not fall within the FSIA's arbitration exception, and that the suit should be dismissed under forum non conveniens – were not addressed below by the Ninth Circuit. This Court declines to address them in the first instance,' the US SC said in its June 5 order. Earlier during the hearing of the case in the US SC, India had asked the court to respect the comity of nations by upholding the August 2023 order for setting aside the $1.2 billion arbitration award against Antrix Corp. 'India has great interest in ensuring that the set-aside decisions, and the Supreme Court of India decision on which they are based, are afforded comity and due respect from the courts of the United States,' said a written submission made by the Government of India to the US SC, ahead of the commencement of an oral hearing on March 3 by the US SC. When the oral arguments in the dispute over the $1.2 billion arbitration award were allowed by a bench of the US Supreme Court on March 3, the counsel for Antrix argued that the case 'serves as an irritant to the Indian government'. The counsel for Antrix Corp, Carter G Philips, said during the oral arguments that the Antrix-Devas agreement of 2005 – which was cancelled for security reasons during the tenure of the UPA government in 2011 – did not have any US interests or anything 'that remotely affects either interstate or foreign commerce'. The Antrix Corp counsel argued that only courts in India could deal with the matter according to the original agreement and that the Supreme Court of India had already set aside the ICC arbitration award in favour of Devas Multimedia. The acting Solicitor General for the US Department of Justice, Sarah M Harris, who argued as an amicus curiae on behalf of the US investors in Devas Multimedia in the US SC said that the US appeals court had erred in ruling that a foreign entity like Antrix Corp should have some minimum contacts in terms of business in the US to be subject to US courts. She said that the US FSIA says 'when personal jurisdiction over a foreign state shall exist and omits any minimum contacts requirement. That is all this court needs to hold to reverse. The Ninth Circuit's contrary statutory holding disregards that text, and no one, even Respondent, appears to defend it.' Following the filing of the case in the US SC against the appeals court order by Devas Multimedia investors, several business bodies like the US Council for International Business, the Chamber of Commerce of the USA and the American Petroleum Institute supported the stand of the investors in Devas Multimedia – that an enterprise does not require to have business interests in the US for federal courts to confirm international arbitration awards. The Ninth Circuit court's order that a foreign entity must have minimum contact or presence in the US to be liable to suits 'undermines (the US) Congress's goal of creating a uniform body of law concerning the amenability of a foreign sovereign to suit in United States courts,' the foreign investors in Devas Multimedia argued. The August 1, 2023, order of the US appeals court was a major relief for Antrix Corp and the Indian government, which is fighting legal battles all over the world in connection with a 2011 decision of the UPA government to annul a satellite deal with Devas Multimedia. Antrix had argued that 'there is no longer an award to enforce because the Delhi High Court – the court of competent jurisdiction to determine the award's enforceability – set it aside, a decision affirmed by the Indian Supreme Court.' The UPA government annulled the 2005 Devas-Antrix satellite deal in February 2011, citing the requirement of space spectrum allocated for the satellite services of Devas for security needs. The deal was cancelled after it was cited as a 'sweetheart deal' and another instance of corruption under the UPA regime after the 2G scam. Under the failed 2005 Antrix-Devas deal, Isro was supposed to lease two communication satellites for 12 years for Rs 167 crore to Devas Multimedia. The start-up was to provide multimedia services to mobile platforms in India using the space band or S-band transponders on Isro's GSAT 6 and 6A satellites. After the NDA government came to power in 2014, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) began seriously investigating the deal, even as the foreign investors in Devas Multimedia – The German telecom major Deutsche Telekom, three Mauritius investors, and Devas Multimedia itself – approached various international tribunals seeking compensation for the failed deal. Devas Multimedia was awarded $1.2 billion by the International Chamber of Commerce on September 14, 2015. Deutsche Telekom was awarded $101 million in compensation by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in Geneva, and the Mauritius investors were awarded $111 million by the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in India ordered the liquidation of Devas Multimedia on May 25, 2021, citing fraud in its creation. The NCLT order was upheld by the Supreme Court of India on January 17, 2022.
