wordpress blog stats
Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Karnataka HC Asks IT Ministry If It’s Open to Reviewing Blocking Orders Issued to X Corp: Report

Appearing for X Corp, Senior Advocate Sajjan Poovayya said that while the platform has blocked the requested accounts, they still lack reasoning.

While hearing an appeal to a landmark verdict affirming the constitutionality of the Indian government’s controversial blocking practices yesterday, the Karnataka High Court asked the Centre if it would be open to reviewing some of the blocking orders it had issued to X Corp (formerly Twitter), LiveLaw reported.

Appearing for X Corp yesterday, Senior Advocate Sajjan Poovayya added that while the platform has blocked the requested accounts, they still lack reasoning. The Indian government will present its stand on the matter on September 27th.

In a petition filed at the southern court last year, X Corp alleged that 39 of the government’s blocking orders (under Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000) were “substantively and procedurally” deficient, lacked reasoning, and hurt the free speech rights of its users. The High Court quashed the petition in June, largely upholding the government’s censorship practices online, imposing a Rs. 50 lakh fine on X Corp. The microblogging platform appealed the verdict shortly after.

During yesterday’s hearing, the Bench, comprising Justices G. Narendar and Vijaykumar A. Patil, also questioned whether the court was justified in imposing the fine in the absence of provisions for the same. X Corp had separately argued that the fine is unjust and excessive and deters other platforms from challenging suspect Section 69A blocking orders. It added that this will embolden the Indian government to issue blocking orders that violate Section 69A, the rules under it, and the Supreme Court’s verdict in Shreya Singhal v Union of India. The top Court had previously upheld Section 69A in light of its in-built checks and balances.

Article continues below ⬇, you might also want to read:

Twitter’s original petition questioned the Indian government’s “non-application of mind” in discerning whether content on Twitter posed a threat to public order or not (public order is one of the grounds on which content can be blocked under Section 69A). Some of the accounts and tweets blocked included those of politicians, activists, and journalists. It also argued that the reasons for the blocking must be recorded and communicated with the user so that they can challenge them in court.

In a strong rebuttal, the Indian government argued that foreign entities like Twitter cannot file fundamental rights challenges in India. It also claimed to have followed all the necessary Section 69A blocking procedures. Describing Twitter as ‘miserably’ non-compliant with Indian laws, the government added that the platform cannot act as a suo motu arbiter of free speech online. Doing so would compromise its status as an intermediary under India’s safe harbour laws. Safe harbour protects platforms from being held liable for the third-party content they host.

Read more

STAY ON TOP OF TECH NEWS: Our daily newsletter with the top story of the day from MediaNama, delivered to your inbox before 9 AM. Click here to sign up today!

Written By

I'm interested in stories that explore how countries use the law to govern technology—and what this tells us about how they perceive tech and its impacts on society. To chat, for feedback, or to leave a tip: aarathi@medianama.com

MediaNama’s mission is to help build a digital ecosystem which is open, fair, global and competitive.



Factors like Indus not charging developers any commission for in-app payments and antitrust orders issued by India's competition regulator against Google could contribute to...


Is open-sourcing of AI, and the use cases that come with it, a good starting point to discuss the responsibility and liability of AI?...


RBI Deputy Governor Rabi Shankar called for self-regulation in the fintech sector, but here's why we disagree with his stance.


Both the IT Minister and the IT Minister of State have chosen to avoid the actual concerns raised, and have instead defended against lesser...


The Central Board of Film Certification found power outside the Cinematograph Act and came to be known as the Censor Board. Are OTT self-regulating...

You May Also Like


Google has released a Google Travel Trends Report which states that branded budget hotel search queries grew 179% year over year (YOY) in India, in...


135 job openings in over 60 companies are listed at our free Digital and Mobile Job Board: If you’re looking for a job, or...


By Aroon Deep and Aditya Chunduru You’re reading it here first: Twitter has complied with government requests to censor 52 tweets that mostly criticised...


Rajesh Kumar* doesn’t have many enemies in life. But, Uber, for which he drives a cab everyday, is starting to look like one, he...

MediaNama is the premier source of information and analysis on Technology Policy in India. More about MediaNama, and contact information, here.

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ

Subscribe to our daily newsletter
Your email address:*
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ