2 weeks Ago By Mashable India
Between October 2024 and 8 April 2025, the Union government issued 130 content notices to major online platforms, including Google, YouTube, Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft, as part of its efforts to regulate online content. According to data obtained through a Right to Information (RTI) application, these notices were issued under the Home Ministry’s Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C)-led Sahyog Portal to function as content blocking orders under Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, The Indian Express reported. Notably, these notices are distinct from those issued under Section 69(A) of the IT Act, which has traditionally been used to enforce online censorship orders in India.
The RTI data, however, does not account for notices sent to X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk, under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act. This omission stems from X’s absence from the Sahyog Portal, a government initiative launched in 2023 to streamline the process of issuing content-related notices to digital platforms. X has not only declined to join the portal, but has also taken legal action against the government, labeling the Sahyog Portal as a mechanism for “censorship.
” 🚨New: 130 online censorship orders through Home's Sahyog portal, 785 orders by IT Ministry under a separate blocking regime. RTI docs show the expanding horizon of online censorship in India @IndianExpress https://t.co/mG2x8ktVgd pic.
twitter.com/8RfDgFW7Gl — Soumyarendra Barik (@imsoumyarendra) April 22, 2025 X Corp, which operates the microblogging platform formerly known as Twitter, has been vocal in its opposition. In a case before the Delhi High Court, X Corp argued that it cannot be compelled to participate in the Sahyog Portal, which the government claims is designed to combat cybercrime.
The company emphasized that it “has its own portal to process valid legal requests,” rendering participation in Sahyog unnecessary. X Corp further cited the Supreme Court’s judgement in the Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India case to bolster its position, asserting that the Sahyog Portal operates outside the statutory framework of Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000.
Section 69A grants the government authority to direct online platforms to block specific information under defined circumstances, such as threats to national security or public order. BIG BREAKING 🚨 Elon Musk’s X Takes Legal Action Against India Over ‘Unlawful’ Censorship Under IT Act & Sahyog Portal The petition comes as the Central government has asked X to clarify the responses generated by its AI chatbot, Grok. pic.
twitter.com/Bc4Iv0Lqye — Shruti Dhore (@ShrutiDhore) March 20, 2025 The Sahyog Portal, managed by the I4C under the Home Ministry, was introduced to enhance coordination between law enforcement agencies and digital platforms, enabling faster responses to cybercrime-related content issues. By issuing notices through the portal, the government aims to expedite the removal of material deemed unlawful under Indian law.
However, X’s refusal to join the portal sparked a debate about the balance between government oversight and platform autonomy. X’s legal challenge underscores its concerns about potential overreach by the government. The company’s argument hinges on the principle that any mechanism for content regulation must align with the legal boundaries established by the IT Act and judicial precedents.
The Shreya Singhal ruling, for instance, struck down Section 66A of the IT Act, emphasing the need for clear, narrowly defined grounds for restricting online content, reinforcing protections for free speech. By invoking this judgement, X Corp argues that the Sahyog Portal lacks the legal grounding to mandate participation from private platforms. 🚨🇮🇳 INDIA HIGH COURT REJECTS X'S BID TO BLOCK GOVT CENSORSHIP TOOL X is fighting back against India’s SAHYOG portal, a fast-growing censorship portal launched in 2024.
Govt says it’s just streamlining takedowns. X says it sidesteps the law and kills oversight. The court.
..— Reclaim The Net (@ReclaimTheNetHQ) April 4, 2025 The 130 notices issued to other tech giants highlight the government’s increasing reliance on Section 79(3)(b), which requires intermediaries to remove or disable access to unlawful content upon receiving a government order.
Unlike Section 69A, which involves a more formalized process with oversight from a designated committee, Section 79(3)(b) allows for direct notices from law enforcement agencies, raising questions about transparency and accountability. While platforms like Google, YouTube, Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft have reportedly engaged with the Sahyog Portal, X’s refusal has drawn attention to the legal and ethical implications of centralised content regulation mechanisms. As the case progresses in the Delhi High Court, it is likely to set a significant precedent for how digital platforms navigate their obligations under Indian law.
🚨Elon Musk’s X Takes Legal Action Against India Over ‘Unlawful’ Censorship Under IT Act & Sahyog Portal The petition comes as the Central government has asked X to clarify the responses generated by its AI chatbot, Grok. pic.twitter.
com/glEnoEOQAn — Sumit Kapoor (@moneygurusumit) March 20, 2025 The government maintains that the Sahyog Portal is a critical tool in its fight against cybercrime, including online fraud and misinformation. The I4C has positioned the portal as a collaborative platform to ensure swift action against harmful content. However, critics argue that the lack of clarity around the portal’s operations and its divergence from established legal frameworks could undermine due process.
As the legal battle unfolds, the 130 notices issued over the past six months signal a strong push by the Union government for greater control over online content. The exclusion of X from the RTI data highlights its unique stance, setting the stage for a confrontation that could reshape Indian digital governance. See Also: ‘Mainstream Media Is Trash’ Tiffany Fong Reacts To Sensational Report Of Denying Musk’s Request To Make Babies.
