The Karnataka High Court (HC) on Tuesday sought the Union government’s response to X Corp’s appeal challenging the Sahyog portal, according to a Bar and Bench report. A division bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakru and Justice CM Poonacha posted the matter for June 11, hearing X Corp’s appeal against a September 2025 single-judge verdict upholding the portal.
What’s at stake? If X Corp wins, the government must provide written reasons for blocking content and give users a hearing to contest it, and users can challenge decisions in court.
If X Corp loses: At least 94 intermediaries, including Zoom, Telegram, WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, and Google, can remove content based on government orders with no explanation, no hearing, and no way to challenge it. Posts criticising government officials or reporting on protests simply disappear.
The numbers: X Corp received 29,118 government takedown requests between January and June 2025 and complied with 26,641 (91.49% compliance).
What kind of content gets removed? X Corp disclosed over 1,300 posts received takedown notices in 2025. MediaNama spotted several X users receiving Section 69A blocking notifications in recent days for posts criticising the government, including:
- Hotmail co-founder Sabeer Bhatia’s post
- Cartoonist Satish Acharya’s political cartoons
- Posts asking who misses former PM Manmohan Singh
X’s blocking notice to users states it is “unable to provide additional information due to legal restrictions.”
What is X Corp arguing?
- Sahyog bypasses Section 69A safeguards, the only blocking mechanism the Supreme Court upheld in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)
- Section 69A requires written reasons, hearings for platforms and users, and judicial review
- Sahyog uses Section 79(3)(b), a safe-harbour provision meant to protect platforms from liability, allowing authorities to order removals without judicial oversight or transparency
- An October 2023 MeitY memo authorised thousands of officials to issue blocking directions through Sahyog, bypassing Section 69A
How did the single judge rule? Justice M Nagaprasanna, in September 2025, called Sahyog “an instrument of public good”. The court ruled X Corp cannot claim Article 19 free speech violations since that right applies only to Indian citizens and held Shreya Singhal doesn’t apply to the 2021 IT Rules.
Portal’s expanding scope:
What critics said previously: DigiPub and Abhinandan Sekhri, co-founder of Newslaundry, had intervened in the case, arguing content creators don’t receive grounds for removal and cannot challenge takedowns. Policy expert Pranesh Prakash said the judgement failed to address whether Sahyog aligns with constitutional limits on free expression.
Also read:
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
