The Supreme Court has questioned whether social media posts can be removed without giving the account holder a chance to be heard. A bench of Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih indicated that if a post is linked to an identifiable individual, that person should be notified before the content is taken down.
“Prima facie, we both feel that if there is an identifiable person, then notice should be issued,” the bench remarked while issuing a notice to the Central government.
The case, brought by the Software Freedom Law Centre, highlights concerns over social media platforms like X (formerly Twitter) removing posts at the government’s direction without informing the user. Senior counsel representing the petitioner argued that such actions violate principles of natural justice, as users are left in the dark while their content disappears.
Pointing to existing regulations, she noted that current rules allow notices to be served only to intermediaries, often bypassing the original poster. The confidentiality of takedown requests, she argued, further exacerbates the problem.
The bench acknowledged the potential for a different interpretation—one where the State is required to notify an identifiable individual before a post is removed. The court also took note of past instances, including the long-term suspension of a senior advocate’s social media account without a hearing.
With the government now required to respond, the case could set a precedent for how online speech is regulated in India.
