Elon Musk-owned X has, in a sharply worded affidavit to a petition challenging the blocking of an account, informed Delhi High Court that the action followed a government directive that accused the user of posting content portraying Prime Minister Narendra Modi in a bad light.
The social media platform also told the court that it had written to the ministry of electronics and information technology (MeitY), requesting it to review its “disproportionate” order to block 12 accounts.
According to the X affidavit, the government had on March 18 asked it to block 12 accounts, including parody accounts @DrNimoYadav, @Nehr_who, @indian_armada, and satirical handles like @mrjethwani_ and @Doc_RGM. Commentator and activist Sandeep Singh’s account was also withheld.
Prateek Sharma, who handles @DrNimoYadav, moved the court seeking to know the reason behind his account being withheld.
Responding to his petition, X told the high court that the government ordered the action as the account was allegedly sharing photographs, videos and Al-generated content related to the Prime Minister.
According to X, the government had flagged @DrNimoYadav for spreading
false narratives involving Modi and accusing him of being incompetent.
While ordering the gag, the Centre had invoked Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which empowers the government to restrict public access to
any online information, website or application in national interest.
The Musk-owned platform said the Centre’s order did not even meet the threshold required to invoke Section 69A.
X underscored that a vast majority of the content posted by the affected accounts did not appear to fall within the ambit of Section 69A.
“Thus, account-level blocking, as opposed to post-level blocking, is disproportionate and does not constitute the least intrusive measure as mandated under law,” X stated.
The social media platform also underlined the fact that the affected users were not granted an opportunity to be heard and requested the government “to review the decision”.
The high court will hear the case again next week.