Bengaluru/New Delhi:
On Friday, 18 July 2025, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta demonstrated before the Karnataka High Court how easily misinformation can spread online by creating a fake X account under the title “Supreme Court of Karnataka”, complete with a verification tick. He presented his mobile device to Justice M. Nagaprasanna to underscore the risks posed by anonymous or misleading content.
“We have opened one account in the name of the Supreme Court of Karnataka and Twitter (X) has opened that account. It is a verified account by Twitter (X). Now I can post anything in that and lakhs of people… will say the Supreme Court of Karnataka has said this… and I can remain anonymous,” Mehta told the court.
The demonstration took place in the course of hearings surrounding X Corp’s challenge to the Union government’s Sahyog portal, a centrally administered mechanism for content takedown orders under Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act. The portal is being contested by X, which contends that these takedown notices bypass safeguards established under Section 69A.
Senior counsel for X Corp, K. G. Raghavan, objected to the surprise demonstration, stating that the government had not furnished details of the account beforehand and that it had not been officially placed on record. The court then learned that X had suspended the imposter account by the end of the hearing. Raghavan told the bench, “We are a responsible organisation,” confirming the suspension, which elicited amusement in court.
Mehta clarified that the account had been created solely “for demonstrative purposes” with no actual posts made, but insisted it illustrated a serious lacuna in platform accountability. He further raised concerns about user anonymity and accountability:
“If a user posts illegal content and is anonymous, who will the aggrieved party sue? X Corp has no officers in India except a grievance officer. Where is the accountability?”.
The Solicitor General also noted the rise of AI-generated misinformation, pointing to cases where “AI‑generated video impersonating a sitting judge” could slip through current legal provisions like Section 69A. He emphasised that other intermediaries, including Google, Microsoft, Amazon and Telegram, have joined the Sahyog portal, while X remains outside the system.
Mehta challenged X’s standing in the case, arguing that a foreign entity not incorporated in India lacks entitlement to constitutional protections under Articles 14 and 19. He also countered X’s assertion of free‑speech protections, pointing out that if the company claims intermediary status, it cannot simultaneously assert speech rights:
“They say they are not speakers or authors… only intermediaries. If that is true, how can they invoke free speech rights?”.
The hearing highlighted the tension between democratic safeguards and online regulation at a time when the government is pushing for more robust accountability measures on platforms. The Karnataka High Court has adjourned the matter until 25 July 2025, when the next hearing is due.
