DigiPub News India Foundation and journalist Abhinandan Sekhri have filed an appeal before the Karnataka High Court challenging a single-judge order that upheld the Union government’s power to issue content-blocking directions to social media platforms through the Sahyog Portal, a move they describe as “a grave threat to the freedom of speech and expression,” Live Law reported.
The petitioners argue that the mechanism, which allows designated officials to send takedown orders directly to intermediaries, poses a grave threat to the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a), particularly for digital news organisations and journalists whose work depends on such platforms for dissemination.
DigiPub, a collective representing digital news media, noted that its member organisations rely on platforms like X (formerly Twitter) not only to distribute reportage but also to express opinions and engage with the public in the digital sphere.
The foundation explained that “by the impugned order, the Court has approved the exercise of uncanalised powers by the executive against online speech,” contending that the Sahyog Portal deprives content creators of both a hearing and a reasoned order, two essential safeguards needed to challenge arbitrary censorship.
It warned that under the current system, journalists and news organisations are not even notified when the content they originate is removed, leaving them unable to seek judicial review.
DigiPub recalled that a single-judge bench on September 24 held that social media required regulation and described the Sahyog Portal not as an “instrument of censorship” but as a facilitation tool meant to streamline communication between authorised agencies and intermediaries.
DigiPub had intervened in support of X Corp’s petition, arguing that the portal would effectively place its 92 member media houses, each engaged in what it described as “responsible reporting,” at the mercy of individual officers issuing secret takedown orders.
The single judge rejected both X Corp’s challenge and DigiPub’s intervention, prompting the present appeal.
In the appeal, DigiPub asserts that it is not the intermediaries but the journalists and media organisations whose rights are directly affected, and therefore their speech lies at the heart of the constitutional challenge.
It further argues that the fear of losing “safe harbour” protection under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act will push intermediaries to comply with even unlawful takedown orders, leading to chilling effects on free speech and news gathering.
The petition states that this undermines both Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g), as it obstructs reportage, distribution, and monetisation of journalism.
The appellants submit that the single-judge order failed to appreciate that Section 79 is merely a safe-harbour exemption and does not authorise any blocking or takedown directions, nor does it create a procedure for doing so.
They contend that the judgment incorrectly interpreted the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), which established that blocking orders must follow due process and cannot circumvent natural justice.
The appeal argues that the Sahyog Portal violates these principles by enabling covert takedown requests without notice to those whose content is removed.
DigiPub emphasised that the impugned system has broader implications for Indian democracy, as it could be used to stifle investigative journalism and critical reporting.
The foundation noted that the “chilling effect” produced by opaque censorship mechanisms threatens the very news ecosystem it was created to strengthen. The organisation describes itself as a collective formed by digital media outlets with the goal of ensuring “a healthy and robust news ecosystem for the digital age,” welcoming membership from digital-only news ventures as well as independent journalists and commentators.
X Corp has also filed a separate appeal against the single-judge order, which will be heard together with DigiPub’s petition.
The Karnataka High Court division bench is expected to evaluate whether the Sahyog Portal, created without statutory basis, can lawfully serve as a mechanism to direct intermediaries to block or remove content in a manner that bypasses procedural safeguards laid down by law.
The post DigiPub moves Karnataka HC against rejection of X Corp plea, calls Sahyog a threat to free speech appeared first on Maktoob media.
