Under Section 79 (3) (b), online intermediaries risk losing their "safe harbor" protection from liability for third-party content if they fail to remove or disable content upon receiving a government directive.
Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, has filed a petition in the Karnataka High Court, challenging the Indian government's use of Section 79 (3) of the Information Technology Act, as reported by the Hindustan Times. X contends that this section is being misused to create an unlawful parallel system for blocking content, violating the Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in the Shreya Singhal case, which mandates that content removal must follow the structured process outlined in Section 69A of the IT Act.
Under Section 79 (3) (b), online intermediaries risk losing their "safe harbor" protection from liability for third-party content if they fail to remove or disable content upon receiving a government directive.
X argues that Prime Minister Modi’s government is exploiting this provision to bypass the safeguards of Section 69A and impose arbitrary censorship. Additionally, the company is seeking legal protection against being forced to appoint an employee for the Sahyog portal, a system that allows state police and government agencies to issue takedown requests without adhering to Section 69A’s procedures. X has labeled Sahyog a "censorship portal," asserting that the government lacks the legal authority to establish such a system.
According to X, the government's directives under the IT Act could result in widespread and unchecked censorship of information in India.
“The law mandates that information blocking can only be carried out under Section 69A, which provides for judicial scrutiny. By using Section 79(3)(b) as an alternative mechanism, the government is effectively nullifying the Supreme Court’s directives,” X stated in its petition as per a Moneycontrol report.
1
2
3
4
.svg)
