SC orders restoration of AAP Gujarat’s Instagram, Facebook accounts

The Supreme Court on Monday ordered restoration of the Aam Aadmi Party’s Gujarat unit’s Instagram and Facebook accounts, subject to removal of objectionable posts. The bench allowed AAP Gujarat’s interim plea and listed the main matter for hearing after two weeks

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday ordered the restoration of the Instagram and Facebook accounts of the Aam Aadmi Party’s Gujarat unit. A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe passed the order on an interim application filed by AAP Gujarat seeking restoration of its Facebook and Instagram accounts.

Senior advocate Shadan Farasat and advocates Siddhant Sharma and Talha Abdul Rahman appeared for AAP. The top court, which allowed the application subject to removal of objectionable posts, if any, posted the main matter for hearing after two weeks.

---

On July 14, the apex court had sought the Centre’s response on a plea by AAP Gujarat challenging the suspension of its social media accounts and web portal. The party contended that Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, which the authorities invoked, was not applicable as it was a safe harbour provision for the intermediary.

In its plea, the party questioned the legal basis for the blocking and suspension of its social media accounts, and a declaration that Section 79(3)(b) was not a source of power for authorities to direct the blocking of information. The plea also sought a declaration that all consequential directions, rules and notifications issued under the provision, insofar as they relate to the blocking of information, are void.

The AAP sought the quashing of the directions allegedly issued by law enforcement authorities for blocking or suspending its social media accounts. On March 3 last year, the top court agreed to examine a plea on the issue of blocking social media accounts or content without an opportunity to the creator or originator to be heard.

It sought the Centre’s response on the petition for quashing Rule 16 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009. Petitioner Software Freedom Law Centre, an NGO, contended that no notices were given to the “originator” of the information and a notice was only sent to platforms like X.