The Karnataka High Court has stayed an earlier order directing the blocking of Proton Mail in India, offering interim relief to the encrypted email provider. A Division Bench comprising the Chief Justice and Justice C.M. Poonacha granted the stay on March 16, 2026, while hearing a writ appeal filed by Proton AG challenging the single-judge ruling. The original order had mandated the blocking under IT Act provisions following allegations of abuse via the platform. The stay restrains authorities from acting in that direction until June 23, 2026, according to the Internet Freedom Foundation.
What is Proton Mail?  Proton Mail is a privacy-focused email service, launched in 2014 by scientists and designed to secure communications through end-to-end encryption. Unlike conventional providers, it encrypts emails on the user’s device, ensuring only the sender and recipient can access the content. Additionally, Proton offers services like a Virtual Private Network (VPN), cloud storage, and calendar tools, positioning itself as a broader privacy ecosystem. Its architecture prevents even the company from accessing user data in readable form.
Context: Why was blocking ordered? The dispute originates from a writ petition filed by Bengaluru-based architecture firm, which alleged that employees, particularly women, received abusive, obscene, and defamatory messages via emails from anonymous Proton Mail accounts. Consequently, Justice M. Nagaprasanna ordered authorities to initiate blocking proceedings under Section 69A of the IT Act, alongside interim URL blocks.Â
The firm also sought identification of the sender via international legal channels. However, Proton challenged this ruling on appeal, arguing procedural lapses and compliance issues, prompting the Division Bench to pause enforcement.
Why this matters: The stay carries wider implications for online speech and privacy in India. Encrypted services, like Proton Mail, underpin secure communication for journalists, whistleblowers, and citizens; therefore, blanket banning them risks undermining legitimate uses while curbing abuse. Moreover, recent IT Rules draft amendments have expanded the executive’s takedown powers, raising concerns about opaque and disproportionate enforcement.Â
Courts, too, increasingly shape access decisions through blocking orders and, increasingly, dynamic + injunctions, which, if exercised broadly, may enable sweeping restrictions. This comes amid a documented rise in censorship: MediaNama found over 40 takedown and blocking actions in March 2026 alone, affecting more than 30 individuals. Taken together, these trends highlight the risk of normalising expansive and potentially arbitrary blocking and takedown orders.
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]
