Supreme Court Rejects Plea To Remove Social Media Posts Against Government, Judiciary
Supreme Court has declined to entertain plea seeking directions to Centre and social media platforms to block allegedly provocative posts, memes and speeches.
The Supreme Court was told content attacking constitutional institutions or religious beliefs should not receive protection under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a public interest litigation seeking directions for the removal or blocking of social media content allegedly promoting “anti-government” and “anti-judiciary” sentiments.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana declined to entertain the plea, while indicating that the petitioner could pursue his grievances before the appropriate authorities.
During the hearing, the CJI asked the petitioner not to give excessive importance to persons publishing such social media posts.
The petition was filed by social worker Hitendra Kumar Parsottambhai Gadhiya, who raised concerns over the circulation of allegedly anti-national slogans, speeches and other material on platforms including Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and YouTube.
Gadhiya alleged that social media was being used to circulate content that targeted the government, judiciary and other constitutional institutions. He also raised concerns over allegedly provocative memes, manipulated material and abusive posts that, according to him, could insult religious beliefs and contribute to communal disharmony.
The plea sought directions to the Union Government, Delhi Government and social media intermediaries including Google/YouTube, Meta, X and WhatsApp to take action against allegedly unlawful digital content under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the applicable rules.
The petitioner referred to several recent controversies involving social media platforms. Among them was the temporary removal of a video posted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Facebook during protests relating to the NEET examination. Meta had subsequently attributed the removal to an error and apologised, according to the petition.
The plea also referred to the Supreme Court's proceedings concerning online content and cited the Court's earlier observations in the Ranveer Allahabadia matter, where the Union Government had been asked to consider a regulatory framework concerning online content.
The petitioner argued that content attacking constitutional institutions or religious beliefs should not receive protection under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution when it falls within the restrictions contemplated by Article 19(2).
The Court, however, declined to issue the sweeping directions sought through the PIL. Instead, it permitted the petitioner to pursue available remedies before the concerned authorities.
Case Title: Hitendra Kumar Parsottambhai Gadhiya v. Union of India & Ors.
Bench: CJI Surya Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice Mohana
Hearing Date: September 23, 2026