Gujarat High Court Seeks Response From Meta, Google, X, Reddit & Scribd On PIL Over Deepfake, AI Content; Asks Them To Onboard SAHYOG Portal
The Gujarat High Court has sought responses from social media intermediaries Meta, Google, X, Reddit and Scribd over a PIL raising concerns about the “sharp and alarming rise” in deepfake and AI-generated content circulating on digital and social media platforms.
The court while issuing notice to the intermediaries asked them to also respond to affidavits filed by the State and Central governments in respect of practical implementation of the legislative framework to ensure strict compliance of due diligence obligations under Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 as amended by the Amendment Rules, 2026.
In the interim the court asked the intermediaries to ensure that they onboard the Centre's SAHYOG Portal for timely action and better coordination with law enforcement agencies.
Referring to the contentions in the affidavits of the State Government and the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, a division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice DN Ray in its order said that issue needing consideration pertained to strict enforcement and uniform implementation of the existing statutory regime in the larger public interest, where concerns have been shown over implementation at the ends of the intermediaries.
The court thus said:
"Taking note of the above, we deem it fit and proper to issue notice to the intermediaries, impleaded herein as respondents no.5 to 9 (Meta, Google, X, Reddit & Scribd), returnable on 08.05.2026...We direct that the said respondents are required to answer to not only the stand of the petitioner, but also that of the State and the Central Government in the matter of practical implementation of the legislative framework and the institutional mechanisms developed for greater alignment of all intermediaries to ensure strict compliance of Due diligence obligations under the Amended Rules of 2026.
In the meantime, it is directed that the respondents no. 5 to 9 intermediaries shall ensure to bring them onboard on the SAHYOG portal developed by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre, Ministry of Home Affairs for better coordination and time bound action by bringing all authorized law enforcement agencies and intermediaries on a single platform".
The court in its order asked them to ensure "swift action/response" to the statutory notices issued under Section 79(3)(b) IT Act 2000 for ensuring adherence to "time bound takedown obligations" in compliance with the IT Rules.
"Effective and meaningful responses/action of the respondents intermediary will be key to the due diligence obligations enforced upon them under the statutory framework," the court said. The court also sought response from the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.
The State government submitted as per Section 79(3) (b) an intermediary cannot claim exemption or immunity from its liability to expeditiously remove or disable the access to the material, any information, data or communication connected to a computer resource which is being used to commit the unlawful act. Upon receiving actual knowledge or on being notified by the appropriate Government or its agency, it becomes the liability of the intermediaries to remove or disable access to such incriminating material.
It was submitted that Section 79 embodies the doctrine of safe harbor, under which intermediaries are protected from the liability for user generated content provided they satisfy the statutory conditions laid down in the Act and comply with due diligence obligations. Further due diligence obligations contained in the Rules, are the obligations of the intermediary in relation to synthetically generated information clearly delineated.
It was submitted that law enforcement agencies are facing several operational challenges in implementation of the notices issued under Section 79(3)(b) wherein lawful notices issued to the intermediaries under the statutory legal framework them and they encounter frequent delays, repeated procedural obligations and non-compliance by certain platforms. In certain cases, even after issuing show-cause notices, reiterating the legal provisions and grounds for removal, the intermediaries fail to provide any substantive reply and do not remove the offending content.
The State in its affidavit thus gave certain suggestions including framing of a policy providing for robust regulatory framework mandating immediate coordination mechanism between the investigating authority and the digital service providers. It was stated that the objective of the regulatory framework is not to restrict legitimate expression, but to ensure that the digital platforms are not misused for creation and dissemination of unlawful content capable of destabilizing public order or undermining democratic institutions.
The Central Government submitted that it has developed SAHYOG Portal, for routing intimations under Section 79(3)(b) read with Rule 3(1)(d). The portal has been operational since October 2024, facilitating immediate, coordinated and time bound action by bringing all authorized law enforcement agencies and intermediaries on a single platform, enabling swift takedown of unlawful synthetically generated information and access to subscriber information, logs and judicial evidence for identification of offending users.
It was submitted that as on date, 524 IT intermediaries have been onboarded on the SAHYOG portal, including respondents no.5 (Meta) and 6(Google). However others, including respondent no.7 (X/formerly Twitter) have not yet onboarded or fully integrated with the portal and often "fail to respond" to the take down notices under Section 79(3)(b).
"There is a categorical assertion with regard to non responsiveness of respondent no.7 intermediary herein to the intimations given to it containing unlawful contents including synthetically generated information. The assertion is that during the period, a total of 94 intimations were given to the respondent no.7 intermediary comprising 60 intimations in 2024 (relating to 1029 URLs), 33 intimations in 2025 (relating to 121 URLs) and 1 intimation in 2026 (relating to 10 URLs) aggregating 1160 URLs containing unlawful contents, including synthetically generated information. It is submitted that as against the aforesaid intimations, a formal response has been received by the authorities only against 13 intimations (12 pertaining to 2024 and merely 1 pertaining to 2025).
Although partial action has been reported by respondent no.7 intermediary in disabling 788 notified URLs in 2024, 70 in 2025 and 6 in 2026, but the alarming low rate of formal responses, results in lack of meaningful cooperation with the lawfully issued directions. Such conduct not only amounts to breach of enhanced Due diligence obligations cast upon the intermediaries under the amended IT Rules of 2026, but also severely impedes the ability of law enforcement agencies to ensure timely removal or disabling access to unlawful content and to carry out effective investigations," the order notes.
Centre further said that SAHYOG Portal has received judicial recognition and affirmation by an order passed by the Karnataka High Court in X Corp. vs. Union of India and Ors (2025).
However, Centre said, the primary challenge lies not to the absence of law or institutional mechanisms, but to the inconsistent, partial, or inadequate compliances by certain intermediaries, specially on adherence to time-bound takedown obligations (including the 3-hour rule); identification and removal of identical or previously flagged unlawful content; timely and complete sharing of data with law enforcement agencies for investigation purposes etc.
Thus it was submitted that the matter requires strengthening of compliance, accountability and uniform implementation of the existing statutory and regulatory regime by intermediaries coupled with effective utilization of established platforms such as SAHYOG.
The matter is listed on May 8.
Case title: VIKAS VIJAY NAIR v/s STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) (WRIT PETITION (PIL)) NO. 9 of 2026