Why X Is Fighting The Government In Law Courts Over IT Act

X has filed a lawsuit in the Karnataka High Court, challenging the government’s use of Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, reported Hindustan Times. X argues that using Section 79(3)(b) is unconstitutional and goes against a 2015 Supreme Court ruling (Shreya Singhal case).

That ruling made it clear that content could only be blocked under strict legal conditions and upheld Section 69A as a constitutionally valid way to do so.

The company claims in its filing that Section 79(3)(b) is being used to create a backdoor censorship tool that bypasses Section 69A of the Act. Section 69A allows the government to block content on the internet, while complying with legal safeguards such as centralised oversight, giving companies a chance to respond, etc.

The microblogging platform has also refused to register itself on the government-run portal Sahyog, which allows agencies to issue direct takedown orders.

X has alleged that the move lacks legal backing. Other social media platforms have complied, but X is pushing back, asking the court to declare these takedown orders invalid.

X’s Legal Challenge

Under Section 69A of the IT Act, content blocking follows a structured process, including a review mechanism. Section 79(3)(b), on the other hand, does not have clear guidelines, allowing different government departments to directly order content removal without oversight.

X argues that multiple ministries, including home, finance, railways, and defence, have been using this section to remove content arbitrarily.

If X wins the case, the government might have a harder time pulling content down without proper legal checks. But if X loses, it could be slapped with fines or asked to comply with stricter rules (as has been done before).

With India being a massive market for social media, this case could shape how platforms operate in the country for years to come. X has run into legal trouble, over removing online content, with the Indian government before.

During the farmers' protests in February 2024, the Indian government issued orders requiring X to withhold specific accounts and posts. X complied but publicly disagreed with the actions.

This came after a similar order issued by the government during the 2021 farmers' protests. Twitter had complied with the order but later restored some accounts. This led to police visits to its offices.

X had subsequently sued the Indian government over the takedown orders of 2021, but the Karnataka High Court in 2023 dismissed the case and imposed a fine of Rs 50 lakh on the company.

Shortly before the verdict, former CEO of X Jack Dorsey had said, “India, for example, was a country that had many requests around the farmers’ protests,  ... that were critical."

Google’s AI model, too, faced some heat, when it made statements perceived as critical of the Indian government. The Ministry of Electronics and IT issued an advisory requiring government approval before companies could deploy AI models in India. After public backlash, this rule was later revised.

Grok In India: Politically ‘Incorrect’?

While X fights in court, there seems to be a broader struggle going on between social media platforms and the Indian government. Over the past week, X’s AI chatbot Grok has sparked controversy in the country due to its responses on certain political issues and sensitive topics.

Users have asked about the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and right-wing influencers. Grok’s replies often challenged right-wing narratives, causing backlash from right-wing supporters.

The Indian government reportedly took note. However, it did not issue any official notice. One thing to note, however, is that the Indian government’s response to Grok has been less aggressive than its reaction to Google’s AI controversies.

The next hearing in the case is on April 3, 2025.