Sahyog Portal Not Instrument Of 'Censorship', Ensures Cooperation Between Intermediaries And Govt Agencies: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that Centre's 'SAHYOG portal' is not an "instrument of censorship", but a facilitation mechanism, intended to streamline communication between authorized agencies and intermediaries.Justice M Nagaprasanna held thus while dismissing a petition filed by X Corp challenging the Union Government's recently-launched Sahyog portal, which is used to automate notices to intermediaries to remove unlawful online content.SAHYOG like a digital post office, instrument of public goodIt said that the recital of difficulties faced by both the law enforcement agencies and intermediaries–ranging from lack of reliable contact information to duplication of notices, delays and absence of accountability–demonstrates the pressing need for a centralized and standardized platform. The court said:"The nomenclature “Sahyog' means co-operation is itself indicative of the collaborative intent underlying its establishment. It serves as an administrative channel, a digital post office of sorts ensuring efficiency and traceability. Since power to issue binding blocking directions, as submitted by the learned Solicitor General, remains exclusively under Section 69A of the IT Act and the Blocking Rules of 2009. To describe Sahyog as a 'censorship portal' is, therefore, a mischaracterization that cannot be sustained".For Context: Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, 2021 specifies issuance of a notification for the purpose of execution of orders under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act and that would be issued to the intermediary by an authorized agency, notified by the appropriate GovernmentThe court agreed with the stand taken by the Union of India that the reason for establishment of a Portal, which according to him is a facilitation Portal, for the convenience of all stakeholders.Following which it held “It (Sahyog) is only a portal under a single umbrella, for the purpose for which it is established. Wherefore, the Sahyog Portal does not suffer from any vice of unconstitutionality. The submission is thus noted to be rejected and the issue is answered repelling the said contention.” It court further observed that the Sahyog Portal, far from being a constitutional anathema, "is in truth an instrument of public good". "Conceived under the authority of Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act and Rule 3(1)(d) of the 2021 Rules, it stands as a beacon of cooperation between citizen and intermediary, a mechanism through which the State endeavours to combat the growing menace of cybercrime. To assail its validity is to misunderstand its purpose; hence, the challenge is without merit,” the court added. Nodal officers didn't drop from air, appointed under statuteThe court also rejected X Corp's contention the nodal officers appointed under the Rules are acting at their whim or fancy. It referred to an October 31, 2023 office memorandum issued by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, directing designation and notification of Nodal Officer to handle unlawful content/information/activities. It said that the office memorandum refers to Section 79(3)(b), which mandates that the intermediary on being notified by the appropriate Government or its agency. Rule 3(1)(d) refers to being notified by the appropriate Government or its agency under Section 79(3)(b).Following which it said “Nodal Officers are not dropped from air, but emanate from Statutes. The blocking of information in case of emergency is found in Rule 9 of the said Rules. The Nodal Officers who are appointed under the Rules will hand out notices to the intermediary to take down unlawful information that is floated on the platform of the intermediary.”Case Title: X CORP AND Union of India & OthersCitation No: 2025 LiveLaw (Kar) 318Case No: WP 7405/2025Click Here To Read/Download Order

Sahyog Portal Not Instrument Of 'Censorship', Ensures Cooperation Between Intermediaries And Govt Agencies: Karnataka High Court

Mustafa Plumber

Tags