Social media platform X Corp announced its intent to appeal a Karnataka High Court ruling that upheld the Indian government’s Sahyog portal, which facilitates content takedown notices. The company expressed deep concern, stating that the order allows “millions of police officers to issue arbitrary takedown orders” without judicial review or due process, threatening Indian citizens’ constitutional rights to freedom of speech and expression.
X filed a petition in March 2025 challenging the Sahyog portal, launched by the Union Home Ministry in October 2024 to streamline content takedown requests under Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology (IT) Act. X argued that the portal bypasses the stricter procedural safeguards of Section 69A, which governs content blocking for national security and public order, and violates the Supreme Court’s 2015 Shreya Singhal judgment, which mandates judicial oversight or government notification for takedowns. X labeled Sahyog a “censorship portal,” claiming it enables arbitrary orders by various government agencies, including local police, without transparency.
The Karnataka High Court, in its September 24, 2025, ruling, dismissed X’s petition, calling the Sahyog portal an “instrument of public good” that combats cybercrime. Justice M. Nagaprasanna emphasized that social media cannot operate in “anarchic freedom” and must comply with Indian laws, noting that X follows similar takedown orders in the U.S. under the Take It Down Act but resists compliance in India. The court also ruled that foreign entities like X cannot invoke free speech protections under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, which applies only to Indian citizens.
In a statement, X argued that the Sahyog portal enables officers to order content removal based solely on allegations of “illegality,” lacking judicial oversight or due process, and threatens platforms with criminal liability for non-compliance. The company noted that the ruling contradicts a recent Bombay High Court decision that deemed a similar regime unconstitutional. X emphasized its commitment to Indian law but vowed to appeal to “defend free expression.”
The ruling reinforces the government’s authority to regulate online content but raises concerns about free speech and the erosion of safe harbor protections for intermediaries. Between October 2024 and April 2025, 130 takedown notices were issued through Sahyog to platforms like Google, YouTube, and Amazon, which complied, unlike X. Failure to comply within 36 hours risks losing safe harbor status, exposing platforms to liability for user-generated content.
As X prepares to appeal, possibly to the Supreme Court, the case highlights the ongoing tension between state regulation and digital free speech in India, with significant implications for social media platforms and their 25 million users in the country.
