Overview

• The Centre argued that the Sahyog Portal is a purely administrative mechanism under Rule 3(1)(d) to issue takedown notices without bypassing the due-process blocking orders under Section 69A
• Mehta contended that X Corp, as a foreign intermediary, lacks locus standi to invoke Article 19 free speech rights and described the platform as a “notice board” rather than a speaker
• Failure to act on government or court notifications through the portal leads to loss of safe harbour immunity under Section 79, exposing intermediaries to liability for user-generated content
• The government highlighted risks of algorithmic amplification and unchecked anonymity by demonstrating how a fake verified “Supreme Court of Karnataka” account could be created on X
• Further arguments are scheduled for July 25 as the Karnataka High Court continues to balance platform accountability, free expression and procedural safeguards under Sections 79 and 69A