X, formerly known as Twitter, has initiated a legal challenge against the Indian government in the Karnataka High Court over the enforcement of Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act. The company argues that this section is being misused by authorities to circumvent established procedures for content blocking, specifically violating the principles set by the Supreme Court in the 2015 Shreya Singhal judgment.
The Shreya Singhal judgment mandates that online content can only be blocked through a competent court order or under the structured process outlined in Section 69A of the IT Act. However, X contends that Section 79(3)(b), which threatens intermediaries with the loss of their safe harbor protections if they fail to act upon government notifications to block content, does not inherently grant blocking powers to the government.
During a hearing on March 17, Justice M Nagaprasanna noted that X could seek judicial intervention if the government took any precipitative actions against it. The government has maintained that no punitive actions have been taken against X for not participating in Sahyog, a portal developed by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) to facilitate the management of Section 79(3)(b) orders, which X has termed a “Censorship Portal.”
X’s legal filings argue that the portal, along with the designation of nodal officers by various Union ministries to enforce content takedowns, represents an unconstitutional and arbitrary extension of government power. The company further claims that this framework undermines the specific and safeguarded process of Section 69A, which allows content blocking only under stringent conditions related to national security and public order, and includes a detailed review process.
The company also alleges that the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) is unlawfully promoting this parallel blocking system. According to X, a memo from MeitY dated October 31, 2023, improperly delegated authority to central ministries, state governments, and police chiefs to issue takedown notices, a power that MeitY itself does not possess.
This legal battle marks another chapter in X’s ongoing disputes with Indian regulatory practices concerning online content. Previously in 2022, X challenged the legality of comprehensive account-blocking orders under Section 69A, though it was unsuccessful and was fined ₹50 lakh by the Karnataka high court.
