Social media can't be left in anarchic freedom: K'taka HC quashes X's plea

The Karnataka HC dismissed X's plea against the Sahyog portal, calling it a public-good mechanism, noting that social media cannot be left in unregulated

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed the social media platform X's petition against the Indian government’s content-blocking mechanism through the Sahyog portal.

 

While pronouncing the order, Justice M Nagaprasanna said, "The petitioner’s platform is subject to a regulatory regime in the United States (US), its birthplace. Under the ‘take down’ law of that jurisdiction, it chooses to follow orders criminalising violations. Yet the same platform refuses to comply with take-down directions in this nation. This is sans countenance.” "Social media as a modern amphitheatre of ideas cannot be left in a state of anarchic freedom," he added, as quoted by Bar and Bench.

 

What is the Sahyog portal?

According to its official website, “Sahyog Portal has been developed to automate the process of sending notices to intermediaries (like X) by the Appropriate Government or its agency under the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000, to facilitate the removal or disabling of access to any information, data, or communication link being used to commit an unlawful act.” The portal was launched by the Union Home Ministry in 2024. 

X's case against Sahyog

X approached the Karnataka HC against the Sahyog platform, terming it a “censorship portal” that allegedly extends India’s ability to regulate online content by allowing government authorities to bypass judicial oversight and directly order content removals.

 

The petition follows several takedown orders from the Ministry of Railways concerning posts about a stampede at New Delhi Railway Station earlier this year, according to Bar and Bench.

 

The Elon Musk-owned company argued that takedown orders via Sahyog are based on India’s use of Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, 2000, and thus bypass the safeguards mandated under Section 69A. Traditionally, content could be blocked only after a judicial review by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) under Section 69A of the Act.

 

The platform further sought a declaration that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act does not grant legal authority for blocking content.

 

The Centre, however, argued that Sahyog is simply a mechanism designed to facilitate swift action against unlawful online content. It also submitted that X Corp cannot claim an unconditional right to ‘safe harbour’ protection.

 

Additionally, the government stated that as a US-based company, X Corp lacks legal standing to file the petition in India and cannot assert fundamental rights under Articles 14 (equality), 19 (freedom of speech and expression), or 21 (right to life and liberty) of the Indian Constitution.

What else did the court say?

After hearing arguments, Justice Nagaprasanna observed that a petitioner who is not an Indian citizen cannot invoke the protections of Article 19, which apply only to citizens.

 

The court further noted that the regulation of information has been a constant throughout history and that X cannot claim exemption from it.

 

“From Orient to Occident, the march of civilisation bears witness to the inescapable truth that information and communication, whether in spread or speed, have never been left unchecked. They have always been the subject matter of regulation. From messengers to the postal age, and now to WhatsApp, Instagram, and Snapchat, all have been governed by regulatory regimes both globally and locally," the judge observed, as quoted by Bar and Bench.

 

Regarding the Sahyog portal, the court stated, "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".