An Indian court docket has disregarded an try via Elon Musk’s X to problem the Indian govt’s content material takedown orders, ruling that the social media platform, as a overseas corporate, does now not have a constitutional proper to unfastened speech beneath Indian regulation.
The Karnataka Top Court docket dominated Wednesday in choose of the Indian govt’s use of a centralized on-line portal to factor content material takedown orders, figuring out that overseas platforms can’t invoke unfastened speech protections beneath Article 19 of the Indian Charter. The court docket mentioned this constitutional of unfastened expression applies best to Indian electorate. The verdict marks an important second in India’s more and more assertive way to regulating world tech firms.
X filed the case in March, difficult a sequence of Indian govt orders directing the platform to dam sure accounts and posts, together with content material crucial of legit insurance policies. On the middle of the dispute was once the usage of “Sahyog” — a central authority portal introduced in October that permits government to immediately order social media firms to take away content material. Sahyog approach “help” in Hindi. X referred to as it a “censorship portal” and argued the method lacked transparency and violated rules of unfastened expression.
“Article 19 of the Charter of India, noble in its spirit and luminous in its promise, stays, nonetheless, a Constitution of Rights conferred upon electorate best. The petitioner who seeks sanctuary beneath its cover will have to be a citizen of the country, failing which the protecting include of Article 19 can’t be invoked,” senior pass judgement on M Nagaprasanna mentioned in his ruling, which was once additionally livestreamed, because the court docket rejected X’s petition.
The ruling comes as Musk expands his footprint in India past X, having lately introduced Tesla operations and secured ultimate regulatory approval for his satellite tv for pc web provider Starlink. The South Asian country is a strategic guess for the billionaire, boasting the arena’s second-largest web consumer base after China and a central authority dedicated to reaching 30% electrical automobile adoption via 2030.
X didn’t reply to a request for feedback. A criminal consultant for X in India was once now not in an instant to be had to remark at the ruling.
Kazim Rizvi, Founding Director of The Discussion, a New Delhi-based assume tank, mentioned the ruling would possibly beef up coordination between the federal government and platforms, however cautioned that “due diligence” will have to now not transform a blanket legal responsibility to conform — particularly when takedowns happen by way of a portal, quite than during the structured safeguards of Segment 69A of the Knowledge Generation Act, 2000. (Segment 69A is India’s primary regulation governing how the federal government can order content material blocking off, and it contains procedural protections.)
Techcrunch match
San Francisco
|
October 27-29, 2025
“To keep away from unintentional criminal results, the portal will have to perform strictly as a coordination and assortment layer — a safe consumption and routing level for requests, and any binding motion will have to originate from a reliable authority beneath the IT Act/Regulations,” he informed TechCrunch.
Content material takedown orders have greater in India during the last few years as extra folks come on-line. A number of circumstances of content material removing throughout platforms — together with X (previously Twitter), Fb, and Instagram — passed off all through the national farmers’ protests in 2020–2021. Those protests noticed common social media task that the federal government sought to regulate.
The government offered the Sahyog portal ultimate yr to expedite the removing of illegal content material from social media, arguing that it will streamline enforcement. Corporations, together with Microsoft, Google, Meta, ShareChat, and LinkedIn, have already built-in the portal to take away content material after receiving notices via an automatic procedure caused via the government or its companies.
In February 2024, X said that, even if it disagreed with the orders, it withheld sure accounts in line with govt directives from the Indian govt. Noncompliance, the corporate famous, may have uncovered it to “possible consequences together with important fines and imprisonment.”
A criminal knowledgeable, who works intently with tech firms and the Indian govt on coverage issues and asked anonymity because of the delicate nature in their paintings, informed TechCrunch that Wednesday’s ruling was once important. The verdict presentations that courts are more and more viewing web legislation and tech coverage via a coverage lens — now not only a criminal one, they mentioned.
Musk, who has referred to as himself a “unfastened speech absolutist,” has now not commented at the lawsuit and ruling, regardless that he in the past raised issues about Indian content material legislation regulations.
“The foundations in India for what can seem on social media are slightly strict, and we will’t transcend the regulations of a rustic,” Musk mentioned in a 2023 interview with the BBC.
X can nonetheless attraction the ruling to the Ideal Court docket. On the other hand, some criminal professionals argue that it’s unclear whether or not the corporate would obtain favorable remedy, as the highest court docket is prone to observe the similar line of reasoning because the Karnataka Top Court docket.
“The ruling didn’t deal with whether or not the federal government will have to also have the facility to make use of a portal for ordering content material takedowns,” mentioned a tech coverage knowledgeable, who asked to not be named because of their shut ties with the Indian govt and main tech companies.
The court docket will unencumber the order’s reproduction on Thursday, the pass judgement on mentioned.
