HC denies interim relief to X in its case against Centre's Sahyog Portal

The Karnataka High Court on Thursday refused to grant interim relief to Elon Musk’s X Corp after the Centre informed the court that there was no reason for the social media platform to be apprehensive of any coercive action against it. Justice M Nagaprasanna said that liberty had already been given to X last month to approach the court if they faced any coercive action.

 

The matter has now been posted for hearing on April 24.

 

On Thursday, X told the court that though it intended to fully comply with Indian laws, there were legal flaws in the new content blocking mechanism set up by the Centre through its Sahyog portal. The platform argued that the mechanism lacked the legal safeguards outlined under Section 69A of the Information Technology (IT) Act of 2000.

   

The government had based its blocking orders on Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, a provision that limits intermediary protections under certain conditions, it contended.

 

Senior Advocate K G Raghavan, appearing for  X Corp, argued that the Supreme Court had upheld the validity of Section 69A in the landmark Shreya Singhal case because of its inbuilt safeguards, including post-decisional hearings. He sought to know whether the government could bypass these protections by invoking Section 79(3)(b) instead.

 

“(The ) whole object is not to empower government to do X or Y but to deprive me (intermediary) of a protection that is given. It tells us when that protection will vanish," Raghavan contended.

 

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General Aravind Kamath, representing the Centre, argued that all intermediaries must comply with Indian laws, including content moderation requirements.

 

“Any intermediary is bound by Indian laws. Joining the portal (Sahyog) is not so grave that you need interim protection,” Mehta said.

 

X had moved the Karnataka High Court against the Government of India claiming unlawful content regulation and arbitrary censorship.

 

In its petition, filed under Article 226, the platform alleged that the Union government circumvented the safeguards under Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000, and the protections recognised for internet intermediaries by the apex court in the judgment delivered in the Shreya Singhal versus Union of India case.

 

The social media giant also alleged that the Sahyog Portal was a “censorship portal” in contravention of the law. 

 

Sahyog Portal is an online system managed by the Ministry of Home Affairs that allows state police and various government departments to issue takedown requests directly, bypassing due process under Section 69A, according to X.