New Delhi: Delhi High Court on Friday sought responses from the Union government and social media platform X on a petition challenging the blocking of the X account of the Cockroach Janta Party.
The plea was filed by Abhijeet Dipke, founder of the Cockroach Janta Party, before Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav.
The Court declined to grant immediate interim relief and observed that the matter involved wider legal and constitutional implications that required detailed consideration after hearing all parties.
Court says matter has wider ramifications
During the hearing, the Bench noted that the submissions raised by the petitioner may contain substance but required comprehensive examination.
“There may be some substance in your submissions, but they all need to be considered. They will be considered holistically after hearing the other side. There are far-reaching issues. There are wider ramifications,” the Court reportedly observed.
The Court stated that restoration of the blocked account could only be considered after the Union government presents its response in the matter.
The Bench also indicated that it may later examine whether X should be directed to place the blocking order on record once the Centre files a detailed affidavit.
Centre directed to file reply within four weeks
The High Court directed the Union government to submit its response within four weeks and scheduled the next hearing for July 6.
In the interim, the Court ordered that the blocking order be reviewed by the designated review committee constituted under applicable rules governing online content blocking.
The Bench observed that the review committee is mandated to meet once every two months and possesses the authority to examine all issues connected to blocking orders.
“It is directed that the review committee will examine all these aspects. The decision be placed on record,” the Court said.
Review committee asked to examine blocking order
The Court emphasised that the review committee must independently evaluate all concerns raised in the petition, including procedural and legal aspects surrounding the blocking of the account.
The Bench further directed that the outcome of the review committee’s examination be formally placed before the Court during the next hearing.
The observations indicate that the Court intends to closely scrutinise both the procedural compliance and broader implications of content blocking mechanisms involving social media platforms.
Petitioner may appear through video conferencing
The Court also recorded that petitioner Abhijeet Dipke is currently not residing in India.
The Bench stated that Dipke may seek permission from the review committee to participate in proceedings through video conferencing.
“The aspect can be examined by the review committee,” the Court reportedly observed.
The matter will now be taken up on July 6 after the Union government files its response and the review process is completed.
Case raises broader digital rights concerns
Legal observers believe the case could potentially raise important questions regarding online speech, account blocking procedures and the transparency of government directives issued to social media platforms.
The Court’s remarks regarding “far-reaching issues” and “wider ramifications” suggest that the proceedings may involve examination of broader legal principles connected to digital rights and intermediary regulations.
The case also comes amid increasing scrutiny over content moderation, account suspensions and online speech restrictions across major social media platforms operating in India.
Further proceedings are expected to clarify the legal framework governing account blocking requests and the responsibilities of intermediaries under Indian law.