The Gujarat police repeatedly used Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act to direct X, formerly Twitter, to remove posts critical of industrialist Gautam Adani and Prime Minister Narendra Modi, according to documents filed by X before the Karnataka High Court on July 28, 2026. These takedown notices were signed by Inspector General of Police Bipin Ahire, highlighting the use of this disputed provision for content removal.
X submitted at least seven takedown notices issued by the Gujarat Police as part of its writ appeal challenging the use of Section 79(3)(b) along with Rule 3(1)(d) of the Information Technology Rules, 2021. The company argued that this provision has become a parallel content removal mechanism with fewer procedural safeguards compared to Section 69A of the IT Act. X also challenged the constitutionality of the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre’s Sahyog portal, which facilitates such notices.
The case underscores concerns about the legal framework governing online content takedown in India. X contended that authorities used Section 79(3)(b) to remove content by citing misinformation and public order concerns without following the statutory blocking process under Section 69A. This approach raises questions about procedural fairness and transparency in content regulation, especially given the political and industrial sensitivities involved.
The Karnataka High Court is reviewing X’s writ appeal against the use of Section 79(3)(b) and the Sahyog portal. The company’s submissions include government affidavits and parliamentary responses, aiming to clarify the legal boundaries for content removal under the IT Act. The case could set important precedents for intermediary liability and content regulation in India.