Centre's Decision To Block 'Hindutva Watch' Account Disproportionate: X Tells Delhi High Court

X Corp, formerly Twitter, has contended before the Delhi High Court that the decision of the Union Government to block the account of “Hindutva Watch” is disproportionate and exceeds the limits prescribed under Article 19(2) of the Constitution of India.

X has filed its reply to a writ petition filed by Raqib Hameed, a Jammu and Kashmir based journalist, against the order blocking X account @HindutvaWatchIn. The plea seeks to restore the account and a direction on the Union Government to produce the relevant records for blocking.

The blocking order was passed after the Central Government issued notice to X attaching a list of URLs that it intended to block, including Hindutva Watch's entire account based on certain posts.

The Central Government alleged that the posts had “the potential to incite violence and disrupt public law.”

“It is admitted that Respondent No. 1's blocking of the Petitioner's entire social media accounts on the basis of certain alleged offending posts is contrary to Section 69A of the IT Act, disproportionate, and exceeds the limits prescribed under Article 19(2) of the Constitution. Further, as stated in Answering Respondent's Objection Letter dated 30.01.2024 (Annexure R2-3), blocking Petitioner's entire Account does not meet the four-fold test of proportionality,” the reply reads.

X however raised a preliminary objection to the petition, stating that the plea is not maintainable as the social media entity is not “State” within Article 12 of the Constitution of India nor does it perform a public function.

It has also submitted that X Corp is not a necessary or proper party to the petition because the Court can completely and effectually adjudicate the legality of the blocking order and grant Hameed relief in its absence.

“…blocking an entire social media account entails not only blocking access to existing (i.e. the backward-looking) content, but also unlawfully extends to a forward-looking prohibition of content. This is impermissible since blocking an entire social media account requires a presumption to be drawn that any content that may be henceforth posted by this user shall be liable for the exercise of blocking powers under Section 69A, which is an impossible exercise,” X said in its reply.

The reply also said that even if some of the social media posts were deemed unlawful, the Union Government should not automatically necessitate the complete blocking of the account in question.

“Without prejudice to the Preliminary Objections above, Answering Respondent does not oppose Petitioner's request in Prayer D to restore Petitioner's X Account in India, and will comply with such an Order if this Hon'ble Court grants it,” the reply states.

The matter will be heard on October 03.

Title: RAQIB HAMEED v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.