The Kerala High Court on Thursday observed that religious sentiments of people are hurt easily these days and even some random remark made by someone about religion is enough to hurt religious feelings of people [Aneesh K Thankachan v Union of India]. .Justice VG Arun made the observation while considering a petition to direct YouTube to take action against an allegedly offensive video uploaded to the platform with the intention to incite communal disharmony and rioting..The judge orally remarked that if a complaint is filed every time someone’s religious sentiments are hurt, there will be many too complaints to deal with." That (religious sentiments) gets hurt easily these days. Every time someone says something about religion, religious sentiments get hurt. If every time a religious sentiment or some other sentiment is hurt, a complaint is permitted to be filed, then there will be bombardment of complaints. In your writ petition, you are saying that your complaint hasn't been entertained,” the judge said..The petitioner, a member of the Marthoma Christian community, moved the Court claiming that a video uploaded on YouTube on Marthoma Bishop, Rt. Rev. Dr. Euyakim Mar Coorilos, by a news channel was defamatory and insulting to the Marthoma community.The content of the video published by the news channel on YouTube was regarding the controversy surrounding Marthoma Bishop Coorilos with the suicide of a seminary student and how he was promoted to a higher post despite the allegations against him.The plea contended that even though the petitioner had submitted a complaint before the Resident Grievance Officer for YouTube, no action was taken.The petitioner submitted there was also no action from the Nodal Officer to issue directions to YouTube India for immediately blocking public access to viewing the said videos and similar videos which have the same content..According to the petitioner, both these authorities are bound by the Information Technology Rules, 2009 under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 to take action.The said video also contravenes the terms and conditions of the User Agreement and YouTube Community Guidelines issued by YouTube, the petitioner argued..Therefore, the petitioner approached the court to direct Group Co-ordinator (Cyber Law), under the Information Technology Rules and Secretary of the Department of Information and Technology to issue directions to YouTube and the Resident Grievance Officer for YouTube to remove the concerned video..The matter will be taken up again tomorrow..The petitioner is represented by advocates George Varghese Perumpallikuttiyil, Manu Srinath, Nimesh Thomas & Sherin Edison.