Indian Court Deals Legal Setback to Elon Musk’s X in Free Speech Battle

Published: 25 September 2025. The English Chronicle Desk

Elon Musk’s social media platform, X, has suffered a significant legal setback in India after the Karnataka High Court dismissed its challenge to a government portal it argued enabled arbitrary censorship of content. A single-judge bench ruled on Wednesday that X’s petition against the Sahyog portal, operated by India’s federal home ministry, was “without merit.” The full text of the court’s order has not yet been made public, and X has not indicated whether it intends to appeal the ruling.

The court’s decision marks the second time in just over two years that X has lost a legal challenge against India’s government regarding the platform’s content moderation policies, raising concerns among free speech advocates and digital rights experts about the increasing powers of government authorities to demand content removal. X reportedly has around 25 million users in India, a market considered crucial to the platform’s global growth.

Technology policy researcher Prateek Waghre told the BBC that the ruling was “worrisome,” asserting that it legitimises government agencies’ ability to issue takedown orders directly to social media companies. He noted that the “full import” of the decision would only be understood once the detailed judgement is released.

X initially filed the case in March against the Sahyog portal, which is designed to automate the process by which government notices regarding unlawful content are sent to social media intermediaries, including X and Facebook. While other major American technology companies, such as Google, Amazon, and Meta, integrated the portal into their operations after its launch last year, X refused to participate. The company labelled Sahyog a “censorship portal,” contending that it enabled government officials to bypass established procedures requiring hearings and review of content takedown orders.

According to X, Sahyog allows “countless” government officers, including tens of thousands of local police personnel, to issue unilateral and arbitrary content removal orders. A lawyer representing X previously described the system as permitting “every Tom, Dick, and Harry officer” to enforce takedowns, though the government’s counsel objected to the phrasing. Social media companies that fail to comply with these orders within 36 hours risk losing their intermediary status and safe harbour protections, which shield platforms from liability for content hosted on them.

The Indian government defended Sahyog, arguing that the platform is necessary due to the “growing volume of unlawful and harmful content” circulating on social media. Officials emphasized that the portal is designed to inform intermediaries about content deemed unlawful rather than to directly issue blocking orders.

In delivering Wednesday’s ruling, the Karnataka High Court stated that social media platforms could not exist in a “state of anarchic freedom” and that regulation is essential. The judge further described the Sahyog portal as a “public good” and noted that while X complies with similar takedown orders in the United States, it has “refused to follow…similar takedown orders” in India. The court’s remarks referenced the Take It Down Act, passed in the US earlier this year, which requires technology companies to remove non-consensual intimate images within 48 hours. X has publicly expressed support for the US legislation.

Experts have raised concerns that the Sahyog portal has led to an increase in content removal and censorship in India. Court filings presented during the case indicated that government authorities had requested social media platforms to remove a wide range of content, including videos of tragic incidents, such as a crush in Delhi that claimed 18 lives, as well as content considered damaging to the reputations of prominent public figures, including the prime minister and home minister.

X has consistently been the only major platform to openly challenge India’s content blocking mechanisms, which several legal observers have described as opaque and arbitrary. The company first challenged multiple takedown orders in 2022, prior to Musk’s acquisition, and faced legal penalties after delays in compliance. In 2023, the Karnataka High Court imposed a fine of five million rupees ($56,000; £42,000) on X for delayed compliance with previous orders, with appeals against that ruling still pending.

The dismissal of the latest challenge highlights the ongoing tension between social media platforms seeking to uphold principles of free expression and governments asserting regulatory authority over online content. As India’s digital ecosystem continues to grow, the case raises broader questions about the balance between freedom of speech, public safety, and governmental oversight in one of the world’s largest online markets.