Solicitor General Tushar Mehta slams Elon Musk’s X in Karnataka HC over content takedown challenge

During a Karnataka High Court hearing on a writ petition filed by social media platform X, India’s Solicitor General Tushar Mehta strongly criticised the company on Tuesday, calling its counsel’s remarks “arrogant.” Mehta, reportedly, defended the government’s authority to issue content takedown orders and rejected the company’s claim that lower-level officials were misusing their powers, reported Reuters today.

“I take objection to this, they are officers and not Tom, Dick and Harry. They are statutory functionaries, empowered to take action. International bodies should not have this arrogance,” he said.

Mehta’s response came after senior advocate K.G. Raghavan, appearing for X, made a controversial remark on the Indian government.

“This is the danger, My Lord, that is done now, if every Tom, Dick, and Harry officer is authorised” Raghavan said, as quoted by Reuters.

Raghavan told the court that the company recently received a notice from the Ministry of Railways over a video showing a woman driving a car on railway tracks in Hyderabad. Calling it a news item, he argued it was not unlawful content.

Responding to Raghavan’s comments, Mehta added that no social media intermediary can expect to function in a completely unregulated manner.

“They are bound by regulations in all other countries but in India they want this luxury,” Mehta added.

The case is being heard by a single bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna. In March, X had filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court challenging the Indian government’s use of Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act and the Ministry of Home Affairs’ Sahyog Portal—described by the company as an “unlawful and unregulated censorship mechanism.”

X contended that the government’s actions bypass the procedural safeguards mandated under Section 69A of the IT Act. These include pre-decisional hearings, written explanations for takedown orders, and access to legal remedies—protections upheld by the Supreme Court in its landmark Shreya Singhal v. Union of India ruling.

The social media platform, owned by the world’s richest man, Elon Musk, further alleged that the Home Ministry’s Sahyog Portal enables state-level officials to issue content takedown requests without adequate oversight, effectively functioning as a parallel and opaque censorship mechanism.

The platform had, therefore, sought interim protection from any coercive action by the government, whether for failing to comply with blocking orders or for not participating in the portal, until the court delivers a final verdict. It has also challenged the legality of takedown directives issued via what it calls a “censorship portal,” arguing that such orders must strictly follow the procedural safeguards under Section 69A of the IT Act, not rely on Section 79(3)(b).