Karnataka High Court will hear X Corp’s plea on July 8 against the Indian government’s ‘Sahyog’ portal, used for issuing content takedown orders. The court allowed X Corp to amend its petition and add respondents.
The Karnataka High Court considered a petition from X Corp (formerly Twitter), challenging the Indian government’s ‘Sahyog’ portal.
This online system is designed for issuing content blocking orders to social media platforms and other internet intermediaries.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna presided over the hearing, with Senior Advocate KG Raghavan representing X Corp and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta representing the Union of India.
At the start, Raghavan informed the Court of X Corp’s intent to amend its original petition to include a challenge to Rule 3. SG Mehta had no objections, stating,
“I have no objection to amendment,”
Also noted that the Union of India had already filed objections regarding the merits of the case.
After reviewing the submissions, the Court permitted X Corp to amend its petition and instructed them to submit the revised version within two days.
Another attorney, representing an Association of Digital Media Houses, argued that digital creators are significantly impacted by takedown orders and sought to join the case. The counsel expressed support for X Corp’s position.
However, SG Mehta opposed this request, asserting,
“Twitter is competent enough, it is an international body. It does not need any support. I would be opposing any third party impleadment.”
The judge sided with the Solicitor General, stating,
“We won’t allow impleadment (by third party). Let it be heard along with the main matter.”
The Court also allowed X Corp to add more government departments as additional respondents in the petition.
Raghavan then attempted to illustrate how the system was being misused, saying,
“I want to show what has happened, and this is the mischief I want lordship to protect us from… Kindly see this notice. May take 1 minute.”
He referred to a recent notice from the Ministry of Railways, which authorized the ministry to issue takedown orders for unlawful content, explaining that they received it on June 26.
In response, SG Mehta emphasized that no intermediary could operate without regulation, stating,
“Let me make one thing clear. No social media intermediary can expect completely unregulated functioning.”
Justice Nagaprasanna suggested that it would be more effective to hear the case in its entirety on another date. The Court directed that the Union of India receive a copy of the notice Raghavan mentioned.
Raghavan argued that Section 79(3) of the Information Technology Act should be interpreted in conjunction with Section 69A, rather than separately. He remarked,
“Even according to them, Section 79(3) is not a standalone provision. It is to be read with Sec 69A …”
SG Mehta immediately countered, asserting,
“No no, it cannot mean that.”
Raghavan provided a real-life example to illustrate how content can be incorrectly labeled as unlawful, saying,
“If a car goes on a railway track, airplane lands on a railway track, it is news.”
Justice Nagaprasanna replied,
“Yes, if designated things happen in designated places, it is not news.”
To which Raghavan responded,
“Some lady drove a car on railway track, it is news. Someone put it on social media. That is considered unlawful content? This is how provisions are misused!”
The Court then adjourned the matter, scheduling a final hearing for July 8.
Justice Nagaprasanna assured the parties,
“We will finish off on that day .. On the weekend, I will also go through the file.”
Raghavan clarified his stance on the third-party applications, stating,
“I am not taking any side with it comes to intervening applications.”
He added,
“But if noble thoughts are coming from any side, it is welcome … I am going back to the Rig Vedas.”
SG Mehta retorted with humor,
“Generating light is welcome, but with these kind of impleading applications they are generating heat. That’s why we are opposing.”
The hearing concluded with the matter officially scheduled for July 8.
Case Title: X CORP V UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS, WP 7405/2025
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES