The Karnataka High Court had previously rejected petitions from X contesting the Centre’s directives to block specific accounts and posts.
Published Sep 29, 2025 | 11:56 AM ⚊ Updated Sep 29, 2025 | 11:56 AM
Representational image. Credit: iStock
Synopsis: Social media platform X will appeal a Karnataka High Court ruling mandating compliance with government takedown orders via the Sahyog portal, warning it enables arbitrary content removal without judicial oversight, violating free speech. The court stressed regulating social media is essential, asserting that foreign entities like X cannot claim constitutional protections and must adhere to Indian laws.
Social media platform X has announced it will challenge the recent Karnataka High Court’s ruling mandating compliance with government takedown requests.
The company labelled the decision as deeply troubling, cautioning that it could enable numerous police officers to issue arbitrary removal orders.
In its statement, X said, “X is deeply concerned by the recent order from the Karnataka court in India, which will allow millions of police officers to issue arbitrary takedown orders through a secretive online portal called the Sahyog. This new regime has no basis in the law, circumvents Section 69A of the IT Act, violates Supreme Court rulings, and infringes Indian citizens’ constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression.”
X is deeply concerned by the recent order from the Karnataka court in India, which will allow millions of police officers to issue arbitrary takedown orders through a secretive online portal called the Sahyog. This new regime has no basis in the law, circumvents Section 69A of…
— Global Government Affairs (@GlobalAffairs) September 29, 2025
“The Sahyog enables officers to order content removal based solely on allegations of ‘illegality’, without judicial review or due process for the speakers, and threatens platforms with criminal liability for non-compliance.”
The Karnataka High Court had previously rejected petitions from X contesting the Centre’s directives to block specific accounts and posts. The court stressed that regulating social media was “the need of the hour” and insisted that microblogging platforms cannot operate in India without oversight.
“Social media companies cannot be allowed to work unregulated in India,” it stated, adding that any company operating in the country “needs to know this.”
The bench clarified that X must adhere to Indian laws, noting that the constitutional right to free speech under Article 19 applies solely to Indian citizens, not foreign entities.
“Article 19 remains the charter of rights for citizens only. The protective embrace of Article 19 cannot be invoked by those who are not citizens,” the court explained.
It further added, “American jurisprudence cannot be transported to Indian judicial thought process,” slamming X for complying with US laws while resisting India’s takedown orders.
The court also raised concerns about algorithms, questioning, “Algorithms are constantly shaping the flow of information — does the menace of social media need to be curbed and regulated?”
Acknowledging the rapidly evolving digital landscape, the court noted that regulation must keep pace with technology, stating that the 2021 IT Rules “demand their own interpretative frame.”
In its concluding remarks, the bench asserted, “No social media platform can take exemption from the laws of the land. Indian marketplaces cannot be treated as a playground.
(Edited by Amit Vasudev)
