The Supreme Court on Friday declined to entertain a plea seeking pan-India guidelines to regulate social media intermediaries, particularly on the suspension and blocking of user accounts. The bench allowed the petitioners to withdraw their plea and advised them to pursue other remedies available under the law before an appropriate forum.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was hearing a petition filed by two individuals whose WhatsApp accounts, used for client communication, had been blocked without any stated reason. The petitioners, who run a clinic and a polydiagnostic centre, claimed they had relied on WhatsApp for over a decade to communicate with their clients.
During the hearing, the bench asked the petitioners why they had approached the Supreme Court directly under Article 32 of the Constitution.
“What is your fundamental right to have access to WhatsApp?” the bench remarked, questioning the very basis of the claim. When the counsel said no reasons were provided for the account blockage, the bench observed, “There are other communication applications, you can use that.”
The judges also noted that a recently developed indigenous messaging app could be used for communication.
The petitioners’ counsel argued that the plea sought national guidelines to ensure due process, transparency, and proportionality when social media accounts are suspended or blocked.
The bench asked, “Is WhatsApp or the intermediary, a state?” When the counsel admitted that it was not, the bench remarked that even a writ petition might not be maintainable before a high court. Instead, it suggested that the petitioners could file a civil suit to seek redress.
In light of these observations, the bench permitted the petitioners to withdraw their plea with liberty to seek appropriate remedies before a competent forum, including the high court.
