Why Google Says It Cannot Stop Kejriwal Court Videos From Spreading On YouTube

The Kejriwal hearing clip that went viral on YouTube has put Google in an awkward spot and forced a Delhi court to ask who is really responsible for what gets uploaded.

Kejriwal's hearing clip that went viral on YouTube has put Google in an awkward spot.

Source : PTI

Show Quick Read

Key points generated by AI, verified by newsroom

• Google told Delhi High Court it cannot proactively monitor YouTube.
• Intermediary liability limits platform action until content declared unlawful.
• PIL concerned Kejriwal's hearing; Google blocked specific video links.
• Court ruled recording without permission violates Delhi High Court rules.

Google LLC has told the Delhi High Court that it cannot be directed to proactively monitor YouTube or stop the re-upload of allegedly unauthorised recordings of court proceedings. The tech giant, in an affidavit filed before the court, said that as an intermediary under the Information Technology Act, 2000, it neither creates nor controls third-party content. 

It argued that placing a monitoring obligation on a platform hosting millions of videos is legally untenable.

What Did Google Say In Its Affidavit To Delhi High Court?

Google submitted that YouTube's responsibility as an intermediary is limited to disabling access to specific URLs after a competent court identifies the content as unlawful. It said the platform has no way to determine whether an uploaded video relates to court proceedings or whether it violates any law, particularly since rules governing recordings differ across courts.

The affidavit cited the Supreme Court's ruling in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, which states that an intermediary gains "actual knowledge" only through a court order or government notification, and cannot be independently compelled to decide if content is unlawful. Google also invoked safe harbour protection under Section 79 of the IT Act.

Of the nine YouTube URLs identified in the petition, Google said several were already blocked or made unavailable before the High Court's interim order dated April 23, 2026. The remaining URLs were blocked as a precautionary measure following the court's directions.

What Is The Delhi High Court Case About?

The PIL, filed by advocate Vaibhav Singh, relates to the circulation of videos from the April 13 hearing in Arvind Kejriwal's recusal plea before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma. 

A Division Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Arora directed the removal of all such links and impleaded the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology as a respondent.

The court noted that recording and uploading proceedings without prior permission is prohibited under the Delhi High Court's Electronic Evidence and Video Conferencing Rules, 2025.