The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday heard arguments in a high-profile case filed by X Corp India — the Indian arm of Elon Musk-owned social media platform X (formerly Twitter) — challenging the legal authority of government officials to issue content takedown notices under the Information Technology (IT) Act.
The case centers on X Corp’s contention that notices for content removal, such as a recent one issued by the Ministry of Railways over a video showing a woman driving on railway tracks in Hyderabad, are being issued arbitrarily and without proper legal backing.
Senior Advocate K G Raghavan, representing X Corp, argued that government officers were misusing their powers under the IT Act. “What if every Tom, Dick and Harry officer sends me notices? See how this is being misused,” Raghavan told the bench, questioning whether such content even qualifies as unlawful. “Some woman drove a car on railway tracks. Milords know dog biting man is not news, but man biting dog is.”
The remarks drew sharp objections from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Union of India. “They are officers, not Tom, Dick and Harry. They are statutory functionaries with legal authority. International entities should not display such arrogance,” Mehta said, asserting that social media platforms operating in India must comply with Indian laws just as they do in other countries.
Justice M Nagaprasanna, who is hearing the matter, also took exception to the language used. “I take objection to this. They are officers of the Union of India,” he observed.
X Corp has sought a declaration from the court that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act does not empower individual officers to issue content blocking directions. Instead, it contends that such orders must be issued strictly in accordance with Section 69A of the Act and the rules framed thereunder.
The company has further asked the court to restrain government ministries from taking coercive actions against it based on takedown notices that do not follow the prescribed legal procedure.
The hearing also saw an intervention application from an association of digital media publishers. Represented by Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi, the association argued that its members are directly affected when platforms like X are forced to take down content. However, the Centre objected to the intervention, with Mehta stating, “I object to any third-party application filed in support of Twitter. It is a capable international company.”
The bench allowed X Corp to amend its petition to include additional Union ministries and directed the government to file a response to the impleading application before the next hearing. The case has been posted for final hearing on July 8.
