The Delhi High Court has made it clear that social media platforms must proactively handle content that undermines the judiciary or tarnishes its members. A Division Bench comprising Justices Neena Bansal Krishna and Madhu Jain emphasized the responsibilities of intermediaries under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The court articulated that once intermediaries become aware of content being used for unlawful purposes, they are obliged to remove it promptly.
In the court’s words, “As soon as it comes to the knowledge of an intermediary that there is information being used to commit an unlawful act, it is under an obligation to immediately remove the information, data or communication link residing in or connected to resources controlled by the intermediary and expeditiously remove or disable access to that material.” The Bench stressed that social media platforms should not passively await court directives when faced with content that could interfere with judicial independence.
The court’s observations came during a case involving YouTube, X, LinkedIn, and Meta, where these platforms were directed to block the accounts of Dr. Kapil Kakkar. Kakkar had uploaded posts labeling a sitting High Court judge as a “murderer” following a building collapse in Saket, which resulted in six fatalities. These accusations included charges of corruption and criminal collusion.
This ruling was part of a criminal contempt of court petition initiated by the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA). The Bench acknowledged that while fair criticism of judicial actions is acceptable, baseless allegations of corruption or improper motives against judges constitute a direct attack on the justice system. The court described Kakkar’s videos as “absolutely scandalous, contumacious” and a form of interference with justice.
The legal proceedings saw representation from Senior Advocates N Hariharan, Rakesh Tiku, and Sacchin Puri for the DHCBA, alongside advocates Kunal Malhotra, Nitesh Mehra, Vidhi Gupta, Karan Shankar Mani, and Vikash Kumar. Meta was represented by Senior Advocate Vivek Reddy and a team including advocates Varun Pathak, Amee Rana, Akhil Shandilya, Vishwajeet Deshmukh, and Pival Peddireddi. Google’s legal representation comprised advocates Rohan Ahuja, Ankit Tripathi, and Aishwarya Debadarshini, while LinkedIn’s interests were defended by advocates Abhishek K Singh and Saksham Chaturvedi.
