Today, On 13th May, The Central Government has withdrawn its blocking order against the YouTube channel 4PM News, the Supreme Court was informed today, bringing relief to the digital news platform after a legal battle.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court was informed that the Central Government has withdrawn its recent order to block the YouTube channel of 4PM News.
A Bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and A.S. Masih was hearing a petition filed by 4PM News against the blocking order. Last week, the Court had requested a response from the Union Government regarding the plea.
Today, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing 4PM News, stated that the blocking order has been withdrawn.
However, he requested the Court to keep the case pending, as the petitioner is also challenging the constitutionality of the blocking rules under the Information Technology Act.
The Court concurred and connected it with an ongoing case that disputes the rules.
Earlier, Sanjay Sharma is the editor-in-chief of the popular Hindi news channel ‘4PM’. In his petition, he told the Supreme Court that his channel was suddenly blocked under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, also known as the IT Blocking Rules. He said this was done without giving him a chance to respond or explain his side.
It was contended that, according to Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, reasoned orders and a fair opportunity to be heard must be provided before any content is blocked.
The plea stated,
“It is settled law that the Constitution does not permit blanket removal of content without an opportunity to be heard. ‘National security’ and ‘public order’ are not talismanic invocations to insulate executive action from scrutiny. They are constitutionally recognized grounds under Article 19(2), but are subject to the test of reasonableness and proportionality. A vague reference to these grounds, without even disclosing the offending content, makes it impossible for the Petitioner to challenge or remedy the allegation, thereby depriving him of his fundamental right to free speech and fair hearing,”
He asserted YouTube’s decision to block his channel, is “arbitrary and unconstitutional.”
The government, on the other hand, told the court that the channel was blocked because of serious concerns related to national security and public order.
But Sanjay Sharma argued that the government is misusing the law to silence media voices. He said that the IT Blocking Rules are being used in an arbitrary way, and they are not giving fair chances to people before taking such serious action like blocking a news channel.
His petition said that these rules are against the right to free speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
The right to free speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India gives every citizen the fundamental right to express their opinions freely through speech, writing, printing, pictures, or any other mode. This includes the freedom of the press and media, allowing journalists and citizens to publish news, share views, and report without fear of censorship or unjust restrictions.
However, this right is not absolute. Under Article 19(2), the government can impose “reasonable restrictions” on this freedom in the interest of:
- the sovereignty and integrity of India,
- the security of the State,
- friendly relations with foreign States,
- public order,
- decency or morality,
- contempt of court,
- defamation, or
- incitement to an offence.
In Sanjay Sharma’s case, he was claiming that his right under Article 19(1)(a) has been violated by the sudden and complete blocking of his YouTube channel ‘4PM’ without prior notice or hearing, while the government is defending the action under the “public order” and “security of the State” grounds under Article 19(2).
The petition was submitted by Advocate Talha Abdul Rahman and prepared by Advocates Mohammad Haider Rizvi and Shaz Khan.
Case Title: SANJAY SHARMA Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS., W.P.(C) No. 465/2025