Bengaluru: A heated exchange unfolded in the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday as X Corp India, the local subsidiary of Elon Musk's social media platform 'X', challenged the authority of government officials to issue content takedown orders under the Information Technology Act.

The dispute arose after X Corp received a takedown notice from the Ministry of Railways concerning a video showing a woman driving a car on railway tracks in Hyderabad. The company has argued that such orders must adhere strictly to procedures laid out under Section 69A of the IT Act and its accompanying rules, not be issued arbitrarily by any official under Section 79(3)(b).

“Tom, Dick, and Harry” remark sparks backlash

Representing X Corp, Senior Advocate K G Raghavan criticised the alleged overreach of government functionaries, remarking, “What if every Tom, Dick, and Harry officer sends us notices? See how this is being misused.”

He questioned the basis for classifying such content as unlawful and commented that the media often thrives on the unusual.

“Some woman drove a car on railway tracks. Milords knows dog biting man is not news, but man biting dog is news,” he added.

These remarks triggered a sharp response from Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Union government. He condemned the language used and defended the authority of government officials.

“They are officers, not Tom, Dick and Harry. They are statutory functionaries with legal authority. International entities should not display such arrogance,” Mehta stated.

Justice M Nagaprasanna also objected to the phrasing, asserting the dignity of public officers.

“I take objection to this. They are officers of the Union of India,” he said.

X Corp has petitioned the court for a clear declaration that not all government officers are authorised to issue content-blocking orders. The company emphasised that any takedown action must comply with Section 69A of the IT Act, which outlines a specific protocol for such interventions.

The platform is also seeking protection from any coercive or punitive measures arising from blocking orders not issued under the prescribed process.

The case also saw an intervention attempt from a digital media association, represented by Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi, who argued that takedown orders directly affect content creators.

However, the Solicitor General objected to the intervention, asserting that X Corp was fully capable of defending its interests.

“I object to any third-party application filed in support of Twitter,” Mehta said.

Next hearing set for July 8

The court has allowed X Corp to amend its petition to include other Union ministries involved in the matter. It also directed the Centre to respond to the impleading application before the next hearing.

The case is scheduled for final arguments on July 8, with potential implications for how takedown orders are issued and regulated across India.

(With PTI inputs)