We Are An Intermediary, Cannot Decide If Content Is Lawful or Not - Twitter Tells Delhi High Court

07/09/2022, 04:30 We are an intermediary, cannot decide if content is lawful or not: Twitter tells Delhi High Court
News Columns Dealstreet Interviews Apprentice Lawyer Viewpoint हिं दी ಕನ್ನಡ
Litigation News
We are an intermediary, cannot decide if content is

lawful or not: Twitter tells Delhi High Court
Twitter has said that it can take down content from its platform only on orders by a
court or a government agency, or if it violates the platform's terms of service.
Delhi High Court, Twitter
Prashant Jha
Published on : 6 Sep, 2022, 10:38 pm 2 min read
Twitter has informed the Delhi High Court that being an intermediary, it cannot decide
whether any content on its platform is lawful or not unless put to “actual knowledge”
after determination by courts or the appropriate government [Aditya Singh Deshwal
v. Union of India & Ors].
https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/we-are-an-intermediary-cannot-decide-if-content-is-lawful-or-not-twitter-tells-delhi-high-court 1/11
The social media giant said that “actual knowledge” has been interpreted by the
Supreme Court in the Shreya Singhal case to mean either a court order and/or a
notification by the government or its agency.
“This includes orders under Section 69A of the IT Act. Content that is notified to the
Answering Respondent (Twitter) by way of a court order or by notification by the
appropriate agency is then taken down. The Answering Respondent being an
intermediary cannot decide whether content on its platform is lawful or otherwise
unless it is put to such "actual knowledge”,” it said.
It further stated that another way content can be removed from Twitter is if it is
violative of the platform's terms of service.
“…there is also a user agreement between the Answering Respondent and its users.
The Answering Respondent by way of its Terms of Service prescribes that certain
content that may be prohibited on its service, and that a user who has violated these
Terms may be suspended or the content may be removed.”
This contractual right remains unfettered by the enactment of Information

Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 [IT
Rules 2021], Twitter's reply added.
Another point made was that the Delhi High Court was already considering whether
or not a writ petition is maintainable against Twitter, and that the Bench in that case
had already part-heard the matter.
The response has come in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) by Advocate Aditya
Deshwal highlighting that several objectionable posts were being made through a
Twitter handle named Atheist Republic, and that despite several complaints, Twitter
has neither suspended the account nor taken down the offending content.
The High Court had in March expressed its displeasure over Twitter's conduct and
asked the social media platform why it did not take action and suspend accounts that
post ‘blasphemous’ and objectionable content about Hindu gods and goddesses, when
even the account of former United States President Donald Trump was suspended.
However, the US-based social media giant has questioned the maintainability of a writ
However, the US based social
07/09/2022, 04:30
media giant has questioned the maintainability of a writ
We are an intermediary, cannot decide if content is lawful or not: Twitter tells Delhi High Court
petition against it, arguing that it is not a ‘State’ as defined under Article 12 of the
Indian constitution.
It argued that it is a private intermediary and its services can be availed only upon the
acceptance of its Terms of Service, subject to applicable law.
Deshwal’s petition was heard on Tuesday by a Division Bench of Chief Justice Satish
Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad.
Senior Advocate Sidharth Luthra appeared for Twitter and stated that almost all the
prayers in the petition have been met.
He said that an FIR has already been registered against the offenders, the offending
posts have been taken down and the account has also been suspended.
The Court listed the case for further consideration on October 28.
Delhi High Court Twitter suspension of Twitter account
Atheist Republic
Related Stories
We must accept that caste system still pervades our society:
Justice DY Chandrachud
Ratna Singh 6 hours ago
Mahesh Murthy's defamation suit over sexual misconduct

allegations dismissed by Delhi High Court on account of non-
prosecution
prosecution
Prashant Jha 7 hours ago

[Actor Assault Case] Supreme Court extends time to conclude
trial against Dileep till January 2023
Abhimanyu Hazarika 8 hours ago
Change of counsel no ground for granting more time to file

report; J&K High Court imposes ₹1000 cost on government
Mohsin Dar 9 hours ago
Litigation News
We must accept that caste system still pervades our

society: Justice DY Chandrachud
The Supreme Court judge said that to know the reality of caste, we must talk to
people who have been subject to discrimination, to stigmatization and assaults on
the grounds of caste.
Ratna Singh
Published on : 6 Sep, 2022, 10:27 pm
Caste system still pervades our society and we must come face to face with that
reality and try to secure justice to those who have been discriminated based on caste,
Supreme Court judge Justice DY Chandrachud said on Tuesday.
He opined that to know about the ground reality, interaction with people who faced
such discrimination is necessary.
"We must come face to face with that discrimination that still permeates and pervades
in our society and to find justice to those who are discriminated on the ground of
caste. I think that is far more important than anything else," he said.
Justice Chandrachud was delivering the inaugural talk at the Office of Diversity and
Inclusion of Indian Institute of technology (IIT) Delhi on the topic 'Realising Diversity -
Making Differences matter in Higher Education'.
The judge was specifically responding to a question from the audience on how to end
caste discrimination prevalent in the society.
To this Justice Chandrachud replied that he doesn't intend to show disrespect to the
question but the whole theme that caste must be eliminated is very often perceived to
be a theme which the upper caste propagates.
He said that to know the reality of caste, we must talk to people who have been
subject to discrimination, to stigmatization and assaults on the grounds of caste.
"Caste defines their identity and everyday of their lives they are reminded of their
castes by the perpetrators of those who practices discrimination on the ground of
caste," the judge added.
The answer, he said, is not to make a casteless society but to empower those who have
been subjected to centuries of discrimination.
"That discrimination still continues as we just heard several examples from our day to
day lives," he said.
The answer must lie in us being aware of extent of discrimination on the basis of caste
which still is perpetrated in our society today, he added.
[Watch the full speech below]
Justice DY Chandrachud's lecture at IIT Delhi
Supreme Court of India Justice DY Chandrachud Caste Discrimination
Caste system IIT Delhi
Related Stories
We are an intermediary, cannot decide if content is lawful or
not: Twitter tells Delhi High Court
Mahesh Murthy's defamation suit over sexual misconduct

allegations dismissed by Delhi High Court on account of non-
prosecution


Litigation News
Mahesh Murthy's defamation suit over sexual

misconduct allegations dismissed by Delhi High
Court on account of non-prosecution
The Court noted that Murthy was no longer interested in pursuing the matter since
no one had appeared on Murthy’s behalf during the last two hearings.
Delhi High Court
Prashant Jha
Published on : 6 Sep, 2022, 9:36 pm
The Delhi High Court disposed of a defamation suit filed by venture capitalist Mahesh
Murthy against a bunch of entrepreneurs, media houses and others who reported and
published allegations of sexual misconduct against him [Mahesh Murthy v Pooja
Chauhan & Ors].

In her order, Justice Mini Pushkarna noted that Murthy was no longer interested in
pursuing the matter since no one had appeared on Murthy’s behalf on the last two
dates and his counsel, dealing with an appeal in the matter before the division bench,
had also stated that he had no instructions.
“In view of the submissions made before me and also in view of the fact that no one
has appeared for the plaintiff today and there was no appearance on the last date also
and that the counsel appearing for the plaintiff in the appellate Court had made a
categorical statement that no instructions had been received from his client, the
present suit is dismissed in default and on account of non-prosecution,” the Court said
in its order.
Justice Pushkarna also observed that it seemed Murthy was not interested in pursuing
his suit since the passing of the July 2020 order when the gag order in his favour was
vacated.
Murthy had moved the Delhi High Court in 2017 following a post on LinkedIn by
entrepreneur Pooja Chauhan.
Chauhan wrote about an inappropriate response given by Murthy on WhatsApp to a

Christmas greeting. The post, which included a WhatsApp screenshot, was widely
circulated on social media.
Days later, a post was published on the website indianceo.in, wherein Murthy was
alleged to have misbehaved during communication on WhatsApp with another
entrepreneur.
This led to further publications on Murthy's alleged misbehaviour on various media

platforms including yourstory.com, Asian Age and the Deccan Chronicle. Another
account of sexual misconduct was also published on factordaily.com.
The High Court passed two gag orders in favour of Murthy in April 2017. However, the
orders were vacated in July 2020.
No one appeared for Murthy in the matter.
Defendants were represented through advocates Gautam Dhamija, Ritik

Raghuwanshi, Mayank Mikhail Mukherjee, Abhimanyu Walia, Karambir Singh, Aayush
Agarwala and Siddham Nahata.
[Read Order]
Attachment
PDF Mahesh Murthy v Pooja Chauhan & Ors.pdf
Preview
Also Read
Delhi HC vacates interim injunction orders granted to Mahesh Murthy in

defamation suit over sexual misconduct allegations
Delhi High Court Defamation MeToo Mahesh Murthy
Related Stories
We are an intermediary, cannot decide if content is lawful or
not: Twitter tells Delhi High Court
We must accept that caste system still pervades our society:

Ratna Singh 6 hours ago


07/09/2022, 04:30
We are an intermediary, cannot decide if content is lawful or not: Twitter tells Delhi High Court

News ⌄
Interviews ⌄
Columns ⌄
Submission ⌄
Viewpoint
Dealstreet
Legal Jobs
WhatsApp Updates
Student Subscription
Follow Us
Subscribe
Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | Careers | Advertise With Us | About Us
Copyright © 2021 Bar and Bench. All Rights Reserved

Powered By Quintype
Powered By Quintype

We Are An Intermediary, Cannot Decide If Content Is Lawful or Not - Twitter Tells Delhi High Court

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

We Are An Intermediary, Cannot Decide If Content Is Lawful or Not - Twitter Tells Delhi High Court

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

07/09/2022, 04:30 We are an intermediary, cannot decide if content is lawful or not: Twitter tells Delhi High Court

News Columns Dealstreet Interviews Apprentice Lawyer Viewpoint हिं दी ಕನ್ನಡ