March 3, 2025: The Supreme Court on Monday sought a response from the Centre regarding the practice of social media posts being removed without informing account owners. The petition, filed by the Software Freedom Law Centre, raised concerns over government-directed takedowns on platforms like X (formerly Twitter) without giving users an opportunity to respond.

A bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih observed that account holders, if identifiable, should be given prior notice before their posts are removed. "Prima facie, we both feel that if there is an identifiable person, then a notice should be issued," the court stated.

Senior advocate Indira Jaising, representing the petitioner, argued that such takedowns without prior intimation violate the principles of natural justice. She pointed out that current rules allow notices to be served either to the intermediary or the account holder, which results in platforms receiving takedown orders without the affected users being notified.

"Because of this, only the intermediary is served with the notice. This is happening because of the word 'or'. Then the rule further states that such a notice is confidential, which makes it even worse," Jaising argued, adding that the challenge is based on Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and expression.

Jaising also cited the case of senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, whose account on X was allegedly suspended for years without any prior notice or hearing. "A senior lawyer of this court, Sanjay Hegde's X account was taken down. No notice was issued, and for years, it remained inaccessible. This issue is in the public domain," she said.

The bench acknowledged the concern, stating that if an individual is identifiable, they should be notified, and in cases where they are not, the intermediary should be informed. The court has now directed the Centre to clarify its stance on the issue.