X Corp (formerly Twitter) has informed the Karnataka High Court that it has complied with 91 percent of the 29,118 takedown requests submitted through the government’s Sahyog portal. The company’s statement came in its appeal against a single-judge bench decision that upheld the legality of Sahyog, which allows various government agencies, including state and local police, to issue content takedown orders under Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act.
In challenging the portal’s framework, X argued that Sahyog bypasses the due-process protections built into the IT Act, notably under Section 69A, by enabling takedown requests without judicial oversight, hearings, or reasoned orders. It warned that the mechanism grants “millions of police officers” arbitrary power to demand content removal, potentially threatening users’ freedom of expression and exposing the platform to criminal penalties for non-compliance.
The Karnataka High Court, in its earlier ruling, rejected X’s free speech argument on the ground that Article 19 of the Constitution protects only Indian citizens, and X — being a foreign entity — could not claim that right. The Court also defended the necessity of Sahyog: it described the portal not as a censorship tool, but as a public-good instrument enabling cooperation between the State and intermediaries to tackle cybercrime, noting that regulation of social media is essential to prevent unrestrained speech.
Referring to X’s compliance rate, the company pointed out that despite its reservations about the portal’s legality, the vast majority of the notices issued through Sahyog were acted upon. At the same time, it reiterated its intention to appeal the High Court’s decision, asserting that the ruling fails to confront the core constitutional questions and procedural safeguards that it claims the system violates.
In response to the Court’s view that X voluntarily accepts takedown orders in the U.S., X argued that its operations in India and its participation in local public discourse merit equal respect. It emphasized that it contributes significantly to Indian conversations and that its users’ voices should be preserved. The company expressed concern that the Sahyog mechanism lacks transparency, as requests are based solely on unspecified allegations of “illegality” without judicial validation, and stressed that the ruling opens the door for arbitrary censorship.
X has now filed a writ appeal for a full-bench hearing in the Karnataka High Court, seeking to overturn the single-judge’s verdict.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.