Adv. (Dr.) Prashant Mali drafts and argues writ petitions in the Bombay High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution - on privacy, the Right to be Forgotten, website and content blocking, data removal, account-freeze relief and challenges to arbitrary State action.
Writ Petition Lawyer - Bombay High Court
When a government authority acts unlawfully, a fundamental right is violated, or an online harm needs an urgent remedy that ordinary courts cannot deliver, the constitutional answer is a writ petition. This page explains what a writ petition is, when it can be filed in the Bombay High Court, and the cyber and privacy situations in which it is especially powerful. It is information, not legal advice.
A writ petition is an application to a High Court (or the Supreme Court) invoking its constitutional power to issue directions - writs - to enforce fundamental rights or correct illegality by public authorities. The Bombay High Court's power flows from Article 226 of the Constitution, which is in fact wider than the Supreme Court's power under Article 32: it can be exercised not only for the enforcement of fundamental rights but "for any other purpose," including the enforcement of ordinary legal rights against the State and its instrumentalities.
Habeas Corpus - to produce a person unlawfully detained ("you shall have the body").
Mandamus - to command a public authority to perform its legal duty (e.g., a police station or agency that refuses to act).
Certiorari - to quash an illegal order of a lower court or tribunal.
Prohibition - to stop a lower authority from exceeding its jurisdiction.
Quo Warranto - to question a person's authority to hold a public office.
This is where writ jurisdiction has become a modern shield. Common situations include:
Following Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1, which recognised informational privacy as part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21, High Courts have entertained writs seeking removal or de-indexing of a person's data — for example, deleting the name of an acquitted or discharged individual from public court records, judgment portals, news archives and search results. This office has obtained a first-of-its-kind order for removal of a client's personal data from the eCourts website, a landmark application of the Right to be Forgotten in India. See the Landmark Cyber Crime Cases page
Where illegal, defamatory, obscene or infringing content must be taken down from instagram, twitter, youtube, blogs or websites - or a wrongful blocking reversed - a writ can compel action. Blocking powers under Section 69A of the IT Act were upheld, with procedural safeguards, in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1 (the same judgment that struck down Section 66A). A writ is often the fastest route to enforce those safeguards or to secure a takedown.
Innocent account-holders whose accounts are frozen or marked with a lien during a cyber-fraud investigation - often without notice - can seek relief by writ where the freeze is arbitrary, indefinite or without due process.
Where a Cyber Cell or Economic Offences Wing refuses to register an FIR, acts beyond jurisdiction, or an authority passes an order violating natural justice, mandamus or certiorari can compel or quash.
Blocking orders, licence cancellations, blacklisting, or any executive action that is arbitrary or violates Articles 14, 19 or 21 can be tested in writ jurisdiction.
Assessment - is a writ the right remedy, or is there an equally efficacious alternative? (Courts expect alternative remedies to be exhausted, subject to well-known exceptions such as breach of fundamental rights or natural justice.)
Drafting - the petition sets out the facts, the rights violated, the grounds, and the specific writ/relief sought, supported by an affidavit and documents.
Filing & urgent mentioning - where the harm is ongoing (e.g., live defamatory content), interim relief can be sought urgently.
Hearing - before a Division Bench or Single Judge, depending on the matter.
Order & compliance - including interim directions (stay, takedown, de-indexing) and final relief.
Urgent matters can be mentioned and receive interim relief quickly; final disposal varies with the court's board and the complexity of the case. No lawyer can promise a timeline or outcome.
In appropriate cases, yes. Courts have recognised the Right to be Forgotten as flowing from the privacy right in Puttaswamy, and have ordered removal or masking of the names of acquitted/discharged persons from court portals and search results. Each case is fact-specific and requires a properly framed writ.
Depending on the content, remedies include intermediary takedown requests, action under Section 69A/IT Rules, and - where those fail or urgency demands - a writ petition seeking directions. A writ is often the most effective lever for time-sensitive online harm.
If the freeze is arbitrary or without due process, it can be challenged - including by writ - to seek de-freezing or a hearing. It is also frequently a sign that you may be named in an FIR, so parallel advice on bail may be prudent. See the Cyber Crime Bail Lawyer page
Generally the High Court expects alternative statutory remedies to be used first, but this rule has important exceptions - including violation of fundamental rights, breach of natural justice, or where the alternative remedy is not efficacious. Whether your case fits an exception is a matter for legal assessment.
Adv. (Dr.) Prashant Mali has argued constitutional and writ matters on privacy, data protection and the Right to be Forgotten, including a landmark eCourts data-removal order. Explore the Landmark Cyber Crime Cases page
Speak to a writ petition lawyer
For a writ petition in the Bombay High Court on privacy, Right to be Forgotten, content blocking, data removal or arbitrary State action, contact Adv. (Dr.) Prashant Mali consultations available online and in person at the Andheri and Bandra (Mumbai) offices.
Disclaimer: This page is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice or solicitation, nor does it create a lawyer–client relationship. The maintainability of a writ petition and any relief are entirely at the discretion of the Court and depend on the facts of each case; no outcome is promised or implied. Please consult a qualified advocate about your specific situation. Last updated: July 2026.