Delhi HC seeks response on challenge to Delhi Police's online content takedown powers

New Delhi [India], May 29 : The Delhi High Court has issued a notice in response to a plea challenging a notification by Lieutenant Governor (LG) Vinai Kumar Saxena that grants the Delhi Police authority to issue takedown orders for online content on social media platforms.
A division bench, comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, on Wednesday acknowledged the submission made by the Software Freedom Law Centre (SFLC.in) and sought responses from the LG Office and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), directing that they be submitted within six weeks.
SFLC has contested the constitutional validity of the notification, which designates the Delhi Police as the Nodal Agency under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (IT Rules, 2021), enabling it to issue takedown orders for online content.
The petition argues that allowing police officers to independently direct content removal, without judicial or external oversight, risks enabling unchecked censorship and arbitrary limitations on constitutionally protected free speech.
It was argued that neither the IT Rules, 2021, nor Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act confer any authority for the establishment of a Nodal Agency, Nodal Officer, or any other positions specified in the contested Notification. Section 79 solely provides conditional immunity to intermediaries and delineates their due diligence responsibilities; it does not grant executive power to the State or Union to institute a mechanism for speech regulation or restriction.
It was also contended that the authority to restrict access to online content falls exclusively within the purview of Section 69A, alongside the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 (referred to as the "Blocking Rules, 2009").
The Central Government has already exercised its authority to appoint a designated officer for issuing blocking orders through the formal implementation of these rules. The statutory framework does not envisage the establishment of any parallel or supplementary authority, particularly at the direction of a state-level executive. The plea stated that the IT Act does not provide for the creation or operation of a Nodal Agency in the manner proposed by the contested Notification.