Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday heard a petition filed by X Corp India, the Indian subsidiary of Elon Musk-owned social media platform X (formerly Twitter), challenging the legal authority of government officers to issue content takedown notices under the Information Technology Act.
During the hearing, Senior Advocate K G Raghavan, representing X Corp, informed the court that the platform had recently received a takedown request from the Ministry of Railways over a video showing a woman driving a car on railway tracks in Hyderabad. He raised concerns about the growing frequency and questionable legality of such notices, stating: “What if every Tom, Dick and Harry officer sends me notices? This is being misused.”
The remark drew a sharp rebuke from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union of India, who defended the statutory authority of government officers and criticised what he described as the platform’s “arrogant” attitude. “They are not Tom, Dick, and Harry. They are officials of the Union of India with legal powers,” he said. Mehta added that international tech platforms must comply with Indian laws, just as they do in other countries.
Justice M Nagaprasanna also expressed disapproval of the terminology used by Raghavan, stating: “I take objection to this. These are officers of the Union of India.”
X Corp is seeking a judicial declaration that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act does not empower individual government officials to issue content blocking orders, arguing that only Section 69A, along with its accompanying rules, provides the correct legal framework for such actions. The company also urged the court to restrain government ministries from taking coercive steps based on procedurally flawed takedown orders.
Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi, appearing for a consortium of digital media houses seeking to intervene in the case, stated that such orders directly affect content creators, who suffer when platforms are forced to remove published material. The bench questioned the association’s standing in the case, but Sondhi argued that their content was at risk of arbitrary censorship.
However, Mehta opposed third-party interventions, stating: “X is a global tech company and does not need additional support.”
The court has allowed X Corp to amend its petition to include multiple Union ministries and directed the Union of India to file its response to the impleading application. The matter has been scheduled for final hearing on July 8.
