Calcutta High Court orders social media platforms to remove video alleging Modi-Adani 'stole India'

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 27 October 2026

Case: Union of India v. X Corp. & Ors.
Court: Calcutta High Court
Bench: Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya
Decided: 9 May 2024
Statutes: Information Technology Act, 2000 — s.69A
Source: LiveLaw

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

In Union of India v. X Corp. & Ors., the Calcutta High Court, on May 9, 2024, directed social media platforms to remove a video alleging that 'Modi and Adani stole India'. The court held that the video violated Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, as it was defamatory and aimed at creating public disorder.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

Content that is defamatory, promotes public disorder, or undermines public confidence in the government can be restricted under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and social media intermediaries are obligated to remove such content upon court order.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates seeking content removal must demonstrate how the content falls within the grounds specified in Section 69A of the IT Act. Litigants should be aware that courts can compel social media platforms to remove content deemed unlawful, even if the content is political in nature.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Social media platforms can be ordered to remove content under Section 69A of the IT Act.
2Defamatory content or content promoting public disorder can be restricted.
3The court emphasized the need to balance free speech with public order and national security.

The Legal Issue The Union of India sought an order from the Calcutta High Court to compel social media platforms, including X Corp. (formerly Twitter), to remove a video circulating online. The video allegedly contained defamatory content, claiming that 'Modi and Adani stole India', and was deemed to be aimed at creating public disorder and undermining public confidence in the government. The core legal question was whether such content could be restricted under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Court's Reasoning Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya of the Calcutta High Court, in the case of Union of India v. X Corp. & Ors., found that the video's content was indeed defamatory and had the potential to incite public disorder. The court observed that the allegations made in the video were unsubstantiated and could lead to a breakdown of public trust in the government. Citing Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which allows the government to block public access to information for reasons including public order, decency, or defamation, the court concluded that the video fell within the purview of this section. The court balanced the right to freedom of speech with the necessity of maintaining public order and preventing the spread of misinformation that could harm national security or public confidence.

What Follows The Calcutta High Court directed the concerned social media platforms to immediately remove the impugned video from their respective platforms. The order ensures that the content deemed unlawful and harmful is no longer accessible to the public. The platforms are now obligated to comply with this directive.