Aarohi Girisb Dhumale
The Delhi High Court has held that a writ petition cannot be filed against a social media platform like X since it is a private entity; and not a government body carrying out governmental functions and duties. This judgment arose as a result of a writ petition filed by Mr. Sanchit Gupta.
Mr. Gupta had created an account on the social media platform X. He also subscribed to X Premium and X Premium Plus. In August 2023, Mr. Gupta was informed via email by X that he was eligible to receive a share of the revenue generated from advertising through his account. He received this share till September 2023, i.e., until his account was abruptly suspended. In June 2024, Mr. Gupta noticed that his follower count had stagnated, and his account faced shadow banning and other restrictions. Also, his monetisation was stopped as a result of the suspension of his account. Mr. Gupta filed several appeals to X to restore his account, but they weren’t acknowledged.
Mr. Gupta filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. He argued that X, being a public platform, performs public functions and public duties. He contended that suspending his account without prior notice or a warning and without giving him an opportunity to be heard constituted a gross violation of the principles of natural justice.
Key issues involved in this case were whether a writ petition can be filed against a private entity like X which performs functions that could be said to be public in nature, whether suspension of Mr. Gupta’s account violated his fundamental rights, and whether a private entity providing a platform for public discourse can come under constitutional scrutiny.
Justice Sanjay Narula, who heard the case, held that despite X being a public platform; it is a private entity and doesn’t carry out governmental functions and duties. In order for a writ to be maintainable against a private entity, that entity needs to carry out governmental functions and duties. X is a voluntary entity which isn’t formed under a law and doesn’t carry out any essential functions. Although a public function is difficult to define, it can sometimes be carried out by a private entity if the Government has directed it to do so. The Court held that though principles of natural justice have been violated, a writ petition is not maintainable for the same. The petitioner also wanted a writ of mandamus to be issued against the Union of India to enforce the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. The Court held that there was no evidence of neglect of duty by the Union of India to invoke such a writ.
Case Title: Sanchit Gupta v. Union of India and Anr
Case Number: W.P. (C) 10030/2024
Bench: Justice Sanjay Narula