- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Delhi High Court Closes Google's...
Delhi High Court Closes Google's Plea Against Competition Commission Of India Alleging Leak Of Confidential Report
Nupur Thapliyal
27 Sept 2021 4:08 PM IST
The Delhi High Court on Monday closed the petition filed by Google India against the alleged leak of a confidential report, prepared by the investigative arm of Competition Commission of India over the company's alleged anti-competitive practices after taking on record the stand of CCI that it has no objection to accept all requests of Google in regards of confidentiality.Taking on record...
The Delhi High Court on Monday closed the petition filed by Google India against the alleged leak of a confidential report, prepared by the investigative arm of Competition Commission of India over the company's alleged anti-competitive practices after taking on record the stand of CCI that it has no objection to accept all requests of Google in regards of confidentiality.
Taking on record the suggestions put forth by the Commission, Justice Rekha Palli disposed of the petition with a liberty to Google for taking appropriate legal recourse in law in case it still has a grievance that the information is further leaked.
"Respondent no 1 has come up with suggestions which have been handed over in Court and taken on record. Learned ASG submits that even though the Commission stands by legality of impugned order and there is no question of breach of confidential information or leaking information to media, in order to expedite proceedings, it has no objection to accept all requests of the petitioner of confidentiality. The commission is willing to entertain confidentiality claims as contained in the application submitted," the Court recorded in its order.
However, the Court made it clear that it has not expressed any opinion on the claim of Google that it was the Competition Commission of India which is responsible for the said leaks.
During the course of hearing today, Dr. Abhishek Singhvi appearing for Google submitted that though it has received certain suggestions from the CCI, the Court must take into consideration three elements.
First, that it should take into record the stand taken by CCI; Two, that CCI's earlier stand on the enquriy set out in the letter must be taken into record and Third, that the Commission has not leaked the information and does not intend to do so in the future while granting Google the liberty to approach the Court.
Adding to Google's submissions, Advocate Aditya Dhupar argued that the leak happened when it was only in the power and possession of CCI.
"In case of any further leak, we will come to Court," he added.
On the other hand, ASG Venkataraman maintained the stand taken by the Commission earlier by submitting that it was completely unaware about the leaks.
"This writ petition has nothing to do with leakage," submitted the ASG.
"We disown this statement. In June, there was the report. In August they file an application. There was no leaks then. A report which is there in June and there is no leak! We have a lot of things to say," he added.
Earlier, the CCI had denied the allegations levelled by Google and suggested that instead of making bald allegations against a Government body, the search engine company should sue the concerned media houses that claim to have accessed the report.
Accordingly, taking on record the Commission's stand, the plea was disposed of.
On September 18, 2021, a confidential interim fact-finding report submitted by the Director General's office to the Competition Commission of India (CCI) relating to an ongoing investigation into Google's Android smartphone agreements was leaked to the media, Google has claimed in a press release. The US-based tech giant claims that it is yet to receive a copy of this confidential report.
"Protecting confidential information is fundamental to any governmental investigation," a Google spokesperson reportedly said.
The probe accuses Google of imposing and forcing one-sided contracts on Android devices as well as app makers to ensure that its own products and apps maintain primacy in consumer usage, and come pre-installed and as default options to get the highest user preference, reported TOI.
Case Title: Google v. CCI