New Delhi: The Centre on Friday, April 10, informed the Delhi High Court that steps have been initiated according to law to block certain allegedly derogatory and communally sensitive tweets by journalist Rana Ayyub.
In a note submitted to Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, the central government and the police stated that the investigating agency requested the authority concerned on April 9 to block the objectionable posts as per section 69A of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000.
The request is under consideration and appropriate action under IT Blocking Rules would be taken by the authority and Ayyub was free to seek appropriate legal remedies if she is aggrieved by any decision taken in the matter, the Centre said.
“It is submitted that the Union of India under the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 has already initiated the proceedings in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the Designated Officer appointed under Rule 03, upon being satisfied that the circumstances warrant invocation of emergency powers under Rule 09, shall take an appropriate decision which shall be placed before this Hon’ble Court,” the note said.
Rule 9 provides for the blocking of information in cases of emergency.
Justice Kaurav was hearing a lawyer’s petition seeking that Ayyub’s tweets, which allegedly insulted Hindu deities and “revered historical figures”, should be taken down.
The judge listed the matter for further hearing on May 19 and granted Ayyub time to file her reply.
X not removing Ayyub’s ‘unlawful content’ amounts to non-compliance
In the note, the Centre further said that despite having “actual knowledge,” X, formerly known as Twitter, did not remove the “unlawful content from its platform.”
It claimed that the inaction amounts to non-compliance with the due diligence requirements under the law and “facilitates continues commission of unlawful acts” by Ayyub, which makes it liable to lose the safe harbour protection available to it as an intermediary.
The Centre informed that Delhi Police sent notices on September 13, 2025 and December 18, 2025, to X to take down the tweets, and on January 25, 2025, a magisterial court also ordered registration of a first information report (FIR) in relation to the content.
X, on the other hand, told the court that it has provided the information sought by Delhi Police and since the “originator” was known, any direction to take down the tweets should go to her and not the platform.
In its written submissions, X further said the Centre and Delhi Police ought to follow the procedure laid down under section 69A and the blocking rules to block the tweets and that the petition was not maintainable against it.
“In this case, Respondent No. 4’s posts are squarely covered under the heads of Section 69A. The Petitioner’s allegations in the Petition, and Delhi Police’s allegations, are that the posts affect “public order,” “defence of India,” “security of the State,” and constitute “incitement to the commission of any cognizable offence relating to above,” all of which are Section 69A grounds, X’s written submissions said.
Delhi police to work with X
On April 8, the high court termed the tweets posted by Ayyub as “highly derogatory, inflammatory and communal” as it sought her stand on the petition.
Justice Kaurav observed that even an FIR was asked to be registered against her in relation to the tweets and called upon the Centre, Delhi Police and X to “work in tandem” and “do the needful in 24 hours”.
The petitioner Amita Sachdeva said she was a devout follower of Sanatan Dharma, and on her complaint, a magisterial court has already directed the registration of an FIR while holding that her tweets prima facie disclose cognizable offences under the Indian Penal Code.
The plea said the petitioner approached X’s Resident Grievance Officer as well as the Grievance Appellate Committee for the removal of the content.
However, the committee declined to grant relief, stating the matter was sub judice, it added.
The petitioner said the continued public availability of the tweets was causing continuing and direct injury to her religious sentiments and violated her fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 21 (Right to life and liberty) and 25 (Freedom of religion) of the Constitution of India.
In January 2025, a magisterial court directed Delhi Police to register an FIR against Rana Ayyub for allegedly making some derogatory posts in 2016-17 that included “insults to Hindu deities, spreading of anti-India sentiment and incitement of religious disharmony.”
In an order dated January 25, 2025, it said, “From the facts of the case, prima facie cognisable offences are made out under sections 153 A (punishment for promoting enmity between different groups on the ground of religion, race, place of birth, residence, language, etc), 295 A (deliberate and malicious acts, intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) and 505 (statements conducing public mischief) of the IPC.”
