Govt Assures Due Process in Any Potential Ban
The Karnataka High Court has received confirmation from the Union Government that it has not blocked Proton Mail in India under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Additional Solicitor General Aravin Kamath made this submission. They emphasized that blocking cannot happen arbitrarily and must follow the prescribed legal process.
The court was hearing a petition seeking a ban on Proton Mail, filed by M Moser Design Associated India Pvt Ltd. The company alleged that the encrypted email service was being misused for cyber harassment of its female employees. This was through deepfake images, obscene emails, and sexually explicit content.
Court Decision
The single-judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna had earlier directed the government to detail steps taken to prevent the illegal use of Proton Mail. However, in its response, the government confirmed that no official action had been taken to block the service.
The court has scheduled the next hearing for March 21, 2025, after the petitioner’s counsel requested a week to submit arguments for a ban.
Background
M Moser Design, in its plea, claimed that unidentified individuals used Proton Mail to send abusive emails targeting female employees. These emails contained:
Obscene and derogatory remarks.
Sexually colored messages.
Deep Fake images.
Explicit content circulated among staff, associates, vendors, and competitors.
The company asserted that such actions caused severe reputational and psychological harm to the victims.
Background: Police Inaction & Call for International Assistance
The police registered the FIR on November 9, 2024, but the petitioner alleged they made no significant progress in identifying the perpetrators. This led the company to approach the Jurisdictional Magistrate for monitoring the investigation.
The police, in a status report, admitted that:
The authorities took no concrete action. Did not utilize Mutual Legal Assistance between India and Switzerland.
Petitioner Stance
The petitioner is urging the court to:
Direct police to expedite the investigation by using international legal mechanisms.
Ensure police seek assistance from Swiss authorities through Letters Rogatory (formal legal requests) to obtain sender details from Proton Mail’s parent company in Switzerland.
Mandate stricter regulations on encrypted email services to prevent misuse in cybercrime.
Conclusion
With the government confirming that Proton Mail remains operational, the focus shifts to:
Arguments on banning Proton Mail (March 21 hearing).
Police action on tracing the accused via Swiss authorities.
This case highlights the challenges of regulating encrypted platforms, balancing cybersecurity, privacy rights. Also, law enforcement needs in India’s digital landscape.
