More Stories

Informist, Wednesday, Sept. 24, 2025

 

NEW DELHI – The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday dismissed American tech company X Corp.'s challenge against the government issuing blocking orders to it under Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and not Section 69A. It also dismissed X Corp.'s challenge to the legality of the central government's Sahyog portal, an online platform used to issue content takedown orders to intermediaries.

 

"The petitioner who seeks sanctuary must be a citizen of the nation. Sahyog portal stands as a beacon of cooperation between citizens and intermediaries. Hence the challenge is without merit," said Justice M. Nagaprasanna. "Social media cannot be left in the state of anarchic freedom. Every sovereign nation regulates social media. No social media platform can treat the Indian market place as a mere playground. In the light of the observations, the content of social media needs to be regulated," he added.

 

The court was hearing X Corp.'s plea to declare that Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 did not confer authority on the Centre to issue information blocking orders. The petitioner sought a court declaration that the blocking orders could only be issued under Section 69A of the 2000 Act, read with Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009.

 

Section 69A of the 2000 Act grants the government direct power to block online content under specific conditions and procedural safeguards, while Section 79(3)(b) is an intermediary liability provision that, by negating safe harbor, forces intermediaries to remove unlawful content upon official notification, which has been used to bypass the safeguards of Section 69A. The core difference is that Section 69A is an order-making power for blocking, whereas Section 79(3)(b) is a liability provision for intermediaries which, when invoked for removal, can be seen as an indirect blocking mechanism. 

 

The petitioner argued that the Centre's Sahyog portal enables blocking orders to be issued under Section 79(3)(b) of the 2000 Act, thereby circumventing the due process mandated under Section 69A. The petitioner argued that the Sahyog portal has no statutory basis and bypasses procedural safeguards laid down by the Supreme Court in the judgment in the Shreya Singhal v. Union of India in 2015.

 

The government argued that the Sahyog portal was merely a streamlined mechanism to ensure quick action against illegal online content. X Corp. couldn't claim that it had an absolute entitlement to 'safe harbour' protection, the government said.  End

 

Reported by Surya Tripathi

Edited by Avishek Dutta

 

For users of real-time market data terminals, Informist news is available exclusively on the NSE Cogencis WorkStation.

 

Cogencis news is now Informist news. This follows the acquisition of Cogencis Information Services Ltd. by NSE Data & Analytics Ltd., a 100% subsidiary of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. As a part of the transaction, the news department of Cogencis has been sold to Informist Media Pvt. Ltd.

 

Informist Media Tel +91 (11) 4220-1000

Send comments to feedback@informistmedia.com

 

© Informist Media Pvt. Ltd. 2025. All rights reserved.