Dr. Nimo Yadav's Account Blocked On MEITY Orders For Showing PM Modi In Bad Taste: X Tells Delhi High Court

X Corp, formerly Twitter, has informed the Delhi High Court that the parody account of Dr. Nimo Yadav has been blocked on the orders of Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) for controversial posts and defaming Prima Minister Narendra Modi.

In an affidavit filed before the High Court, the blocking order says that the X account contains “defamatory posts” wherein photographs, videos and Al manipulated content hav been used to create controversial posts questioning the Government and defaming the PM.

“The said X account containing given URLs, has come to notice for spreading false narratives involving Prime Minister, accusing him of being incompetent as also portraying him in bad taste. Spreading such content without any substance is demeaning and may affect the public order issues leading to internal Security threats to the State,” the affidavit states.

It adds that the MeitY had received requests from nodal officers under Rule 6 of the IT Rules for blocking access to certain posts violating the provisions of Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000.

As per the affidavit, MeitY made all reasonable efforts t o identif and contact the concerned user “but has been unable to obtain verified contact details.”

The affidavit also contains the objection letter written by X to the Centre which states that the blocking order concerning 12 accounts, including Sharma's, fails to comply with Section 69A of the IT Act.

“The vast majority of the content in each o f these X accounts does not appear to fall within the grounds specified under Section 69A and thus the Blocking Order issued by you, directing X to block access to these URLs/accounts is not proportionate. Thus account level blocking, as opposed to Post level blocking, is disproportionate and does not constitute the "least intrusive measure" as mandated under law,” X has said.

It added that no opportunity of hearing has been granted to any of the account holders and that the blocking order does not demonstrate that reasonable efforts are to be made for identifying the person whose content is ordered to be blocked.

“In the present case, the blocking of an account as a whole does not satisfy the criterion at paragraph 3 above, especially since an equally effective alternative is available, i.e., withholding specific Posts that are violative of the specific grounds of Section 69A and demonstrated to be so. Further, the captioned Blocking Order will excessively and disproportionately restrict the account holder's rights, especially as the account holder will be unable to use X in India permanently and without being granted an opportunity of hearing in this regard. The Blocking Order also fails to indicate how account level blocking is the only measure available,” X has said.

The affidavit has been filed before Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav in the petition filed by Prateek Sharma who operates the account in question.

The matter is fixed for hearing next week.