X calls Centre’s order to block 12 accounts ‘disproportionate’, questions applicability of 69A

X Corp has challenged the Centre's decision to block 12 accounts on its platform, describing the move as "disproportionate" and questioning the applicability of Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. In a letter dated March 19 addressed to the Union ministry of electronics and information technology (MeitY), X formally objected to the blocking order, arguing that most content on the blocked accounts does not meet the legal thresholds under Section 69A. The company also stated that account holders were never given a hearing before the order was passed, and that blanket account-level blocking, when targeted post-level removal was available, fails the legal test of proportionality.

X complied with the order even as it challenged it, and the accounts remain blocked. However, by formally contesting the legal basis before the Delhi high court, the platform has at least forced a degree of public accountability onto a process that ordinarily plays out behind closed doors. The matter reached the Delhi high court after the owner of one of the affected accounts, Dr Nimo Yadav, filed a petition seeking restoration of access. X's letter of objection was disclosed in an affidavit on March 31, when the case was heard by Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav.

The Centre cited concerns over the spread of deepfakes and the amplification of "false narratives" as reasons for the crackdown. The affected accounts include those of Dr Nimo Yadav, Bole India, India Awakening, Nher Who, Neha Ingratho, Wankar Sun, Brijesh, ITS CK, Praveen Kumar, Activist Sandeep, Mr Jethwani, and Dr R. G. M.

Section 69A of the IT Act empowers the government to block or restrict access to online content on grounds including threats to national sovereignty, security, public order, or prevention of incitement. However, X's arguments highlight the need for a balance between national security and individual freedoms, particularly in the digital age. The company's challenge to the Centre's order raises questions about the applicability of Section 69A and the potential for abuse of this powerful tool.

While the Centre's decision to block the accounts was justified on the grounds of preventing the spread of misinformation and deepfakes, X's objections underscore the importance of due process and proportionality in such cases. The platform's formal challenge not only seeks to restore access to the affected accounts but also aims to clarify the legal boundaries governing the use of Section 69A.

The case serves as a reminder of the ongoing debate over digital rights and the role of the state in regulating online content. As more aspects of our lives move online, the need for clear legal frameworks and safeguards becomes even more critical. The Delhi high court's role in adjudicating this case will be closely watched, as it could set a precedent for future disputes involving the use of Section 69A and the balance between national security and individual liberties in the digital sphere.