Social media platform X has informed the Delhi High Court that it cannot be compelled to come onboard the Centre’s SAHYOG portal. File
| Photo Credit: Reuters
Social media platform X has informed the Delhi High Court that it cannot be compelled to come onboard the Centre’s SAHYOG portal, which aims to create a unified framework to combat cybercrime, arguing that “X Corp has its own portal to process valid legal requests”.
Pointing to the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Shreya Singal vs. Union of India case, X — formely known as Twitter — argued that the SAHYOG portal falls outside the statutory scheme of Section 69A of the IT Act, which empowers the government to order online platforms to block information in specific circumstances. The portal would “create a parallel mechanism to the existing mechanism under Section 69A of the IT Act albeit without any procedures or safeguards. Thus, it is stated that X Corp cannot be compelled to come on the SAHYOG portal,” it said.
During the hearing on March 18, Mr. Akhil Sibal, the senior counsel representing X, submitted that the Elon Musk-owned platform has also filed a petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging the SAHYOG portal. That petition had termed the portal a “censorship” tool.
Law enforcement requests
The SAHYOG portal is being developed by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs “to automate the process of sending notices to intermediaries [such as online platforms]” to take down unlawful content, its website says. In its second phase, the portal’s functionality will be extended to also send information requests from law enforcement agencies.
The court was hearing a petition seeking to trace a missing boy. In September last year, the court was informed that one of the leads found by the concerned Investigating Officer was that the missing boy had recently used his Instagram account.
The court took the view that, in several such cases involving missing persons, there appears to be a lag in receiving information from the concerned social media platforms and other IT intermediaries during which precious time is lost in tracing the missing person.
‘X failed to respond’
It had then directed various intermediaries and other parties to file their respective standard operating procedures along with details on how they deal with information requests from law enforcement agencies.
The Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) raised a grievance against X Corp, complaining that the platform has failed to respond to past requests for information, even those regarding alleged sexual offences against children, such as content that amounts to child sexual exploitation and abuse material.
Given this situation, I4C submitted that X ought to come on board the SAHYOG portal. So far, 38 intermediaries have already come on board, including Telegram, Apple, Google, LinkedIn, YouTube, Microsoft, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, the court was informed. The court will hear X’s case on the issue on April 29.
Published – March 25, 2025 10:06 pm IST
