The Indian government has asserted that it will adhere to due process and expects social media platforms to comply with national laws. This declaration follows a lawsuit filed by X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk, against the Centre, alleging misuse of Information Technology (IT) laws to create an “unlawful blocking regime.”
Sources within the government emphasized that regulations will be enforced and that all digital platforms must operate within the legal framework. “Process will be followed, and social media platforms should follow the law,” a source stated, reinforcing the government’s stance on IT governance.
X’s Legal Challenge
X, formerly known as Twitter, filed a writ petition in the Karnataka High Court against the Centre and its ministries. The platform has referenced the 2015 Supreme Court ruling in the Shreya Singhal case, which invalidated Section 66A of the IT Act, arguing that the government is overstepping legal boundaries.
According to X’s petition, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has allegedly authorized multiple central and state-level entities, including “tens of thousands of local police officers,” to issue blocking orders under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act. This section states that intermediaries lose their immunity from liability if they fail to “expeditiously remove or disable access” to material flagged as unlawful by a government agency.
However, X argues that this application of Section 79(3)(b) is a direct violation of Section 69A of the IT Act, which explicitly outlines the process for blocking public access to information, including procedural safeguards.
“Section 79 merely exempts intermediaries from liability for third-party content; it does not empower the government to issue information blocking orders in violation of Section 69A. The current attempt to invoke Section 79 to create an unlawful blocking regime is an overreach that lacks procedural safeguards,” X stated in its petition.
Concerns Over Government Overreach
X has further alleged that the government is attempting to bypass the multiple safeguards outlined in the Blocking Rules and Section 69A, violating the Supreme Court’s directive.
The platform claims that the Centre has lawful avenues to block content in emergencies through the existing Section 69A framework, which requires agencies to direct blocking requests through a Designated Officer.
“Any government agency can use the Section 69A process by sending a request to the Designated Officer. Under Rules 4 to 6 of the Blocking Rules, central and state agencies have nodal officers who send blocking requests to the Designated Officer. Any individual can approach a nodal officer, who then forwards the request,” X stated in its legal filing.
X also argued that the government’s actions threaten its business model, which relies on users sharing lawful information. “The X platform derives value and revenue from its user base and the lawful content they generate. Unjustified information blocking orders harm X and its ability to operate. The government’s actions violate X’s Article 14 rights and negatively impact its business,” the petition claimed.
Government’s Response
In response, government sources maintained that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act provides it with the authority to instruct intermediaries like X to remove unlawful content efficiently. According to sources, this provision operates independently of Section 69A and is essential to maintaining law and order in the digital space.
“Section 79(3)(b) empowers the government to notify intermediaries to remove unlawful content swiftly. It is not contingent on Section 69A’s blocking process,” a government source clarified.
The case is expected to be a significant legal battle that could shape the future of content moderation and digital governance in India. The Karnataka High Court’s verdict will likely set a precedent for the extent of government control over digital platforms and the responsibility of intermediaries in enforcing content regulations.
Implications for Digital Governance
The lawsuit raises critical questions about the balance between free speech, platform autonomy, and government regulation in India’s rapidly evolving digital landscape. While the government insists on compliance with laws to ensure a safe digital environment, X’s challenge underscores concerns over potential overreach and the need for procedural safeguards.
As the case unfolds, stakeholders across the digital ecosystem—including policymakers, tech companies, and legal experts—will closely watch the proceedings to assess their broader implications on India’s regulatory framework for social media platforms.
