The High Court of Karnataka dismissed a petition filed by Twitter, challenging several blocking orders issued by the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology on the ground that it is ‘devoid of merits’.
Justice Krishna S. Dixit also imposed a cost of ₹50 lakh on Twitter citing its conduct of approaching the court without complying with the Central Government’s orders. The costs are to be paid within 45 days to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The court also said that ₹5,000 would have to be paid for every day that the payment is delayed.
‘In the above circumstances, the petition being devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed with exemplary cost and, accordingly, is dismissed. Petitioner is levied with exemplary cost of ₹50 lakh payable to the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, within 45 days, and if delay is brooked, it will attract an additional of ₹5,000 per day’, the court stated.
Referring to the operative portions of the judgment, Justice Dixit said that he has framed eight questions in the judgment, including whether reasons should be communicated to the user whose tweet is blocked, and whether the blocking of tweets should be period-specific, or if tweets can be blocked for an indefinite period of time.
Out of the eight questions of law, only one of them has been answered in favour of Twitter while the rest have been answered against it. This includes the plea of Twitter to issue guidelines to the Centre, for the exercise of its powers under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act.
Also read: Why has Twitter gone to court against the Indian government? | In Focus podcast
“Then you asked me to lay down certain guidelines. I felt there was no need for guidelines, as there were some directions in Shreya Singhal (vs Union of India, 2015), and two more judgments,” the judge remarked.
On April 21, after hearing extensive arguments by both parties, the court had reserved its verdict in the matter.
Twitter had challenged several ‘blocking orders’ issued by the Union Ministry between February 2, 2021, and February 28, 2022. The Centre had directed the microblogging site to block 1,474 accounts, 175 tweets, 256 URLs, and one hashtag. Twitter had, however, approached the court challenging the orders pertaining to 39 of these URLs.
Referring to the blocking orders issued by the Union Ministry under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, Twitter claimed, in its petition, that the orders ‘fall foul of Section 69A, both substantially and procedurally’, and that no notice was issued by the Union Ministry to these account-holders.
Also read: Twitter’s petition on Section 69A of the IT Act
Twitter had further argued that the Central Government is not empowered to issue general orders calling for blocking of social media accounts, and that the orders must contain reasons, which should be communicated to users.
On the other hand, the Centre had contended that Twitter, being a foreign company, cannot invoke the fundamental rights guaranteed to Indian citizens and companies under the Constitution of India. It also pointed out that Twitter cannot speak on behalf of its account-holders and, therefore, it had no locus standi to file the petition.
