K'taka HC junks X's plea, upholds govt's authority to block ‘objectionable’ content

In a setback to Elon Musk’s social media platform X, the Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed its petition challenging the government's authority to block ‘objectionable’ content, saying the social media must be regulated.

"Social media needs to be regulated, and its regulation is a must, more so in cases of offences against women in particular, failing which the right to dignity, as ordained in the Constitution of a citizen, gets railroaded," Justice M Nagaprasanna said.

"From Messengers to WhatsApp and Instagram, all forms of communication have always been regulated, globally and locally. Except for Indians, no one could have the right to freedom of speech. Even in the United States, restrictions have been imposed on X,” it emphasised.

Regulation must

Social media needs to be regulated, and its regulation is a must, more so in cases of offences against women in particular, failing which the right to dignity, as ordained in the Constitution of a citizen, gets railroaded. -- Karnataka HC

Advertisement

“Every platform that seeks to operate within the jurisdiction of India must accept that liberty is yoked with responsibility,” the judge said. These platforms carry with them the solemn duty of accountability to hold, otherwise they will imperil both the rule of law and the fabric of social harmony, the HC said.

"Article 19 is luminous in its promise but remains a charter of rights conferred upon citizens only. A petitioner who is not a citizen cannot claim sanctuary under it,” Justice Nagaprasanna ruled.

The high court upheld the Centre’s authority to block content through Sahyog Portal -- an online platform used to issue content takedown orders to intermediaries flooded user-generated content without any editorial oversight.

“Sahyog portal, far from being a constitutional anathema, is an instrument of public good conceived under the authority of Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act and Rule 3(d) of the 2021 Rules. To assail its validity is to misunderstand its purpose,” the high court said.

Noting that unregulated speech under guise of liberty resulted in lawlessness, the high court also rejected X Corp's prayer seeking a declaration that Section 79 (3)(b) of the Information Technology Act did not confer any authority on the Central Government to issue orders to block information.

The high court made it clear that no social media platform can claim immunity from Indian laws.

Petitioner X Corp had moved the Karnataka High Court against the Sahyog portal, contending it enabled blocking orders to be issued under Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 circumventing the due process mandated under Section 69A of the Act and the Shreya Singhal ruling.

X Corp had moved the court seeking a declaration that Section 79(3)(b) of IT Act, 2000, does not confer the authority to issue information blocking orders and that such orders can only be issued after following the procedure under Section 69A of the Act read with the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules.

Section 79 of the IT Act grants safe harbour protection to intermediaries, shielding them from liability for user-generated content, and Section 79(3)(b) removes the same if an intermediary fails to block/remove unlawful content upon government notification.

Section 69 of the IT Act  grants the government the power to issue directions to intercept, monitor, or decrypt information from any computer resource in the interest of India's sovereignty, integrity, defense, security, friendly relations with foreign states, or public order, and to prevent incitement to the commission of any cognisable offense or for the investigation of any offense.

The government must record reasons for such an order, and the affected intermediary or person in charge of the computer resource must comply and provide necessary assistance. The petitioner’s platform is subject to a regulated regime, the judge added.

The court said the X follows the takedown orders in the US, the birthplace and footland of social media as it criminalises its violation. "But the same Petitioner refuses to follow the same in the shores of this nation of similar takedown orders which are founded upon illegality. This sans countenance,” the HC said, dismissing the petition.

The petition was filed following multiple takedown orders issued by the government following ‘misleading’ posts stampede at New Delhi Railway Station in February 2025. (With PTI Inputs)