New Delhi: A major legal confrontation is unfolding in India as Elon Musk’s social media platform X (formerly Twitter) takes on the Indian government over the expanding powers granted to authorities to remove online content. The dispute centers around a 2023 directive and a controversial digital platform known as *Sahyog*, which critics argue has ushered in an era of broad and opaque internet censorship.
The Karnataka High Court is currently reviewing a lawsuit filed by X in March 2025, which challenges the legality of the government’s move to empower thousands of civil servants and law enforcement officials across India to demand takedowns of social media content. Through the Sahyog portal, officials have been issuing removal orders without requiring judicial oversight, prompting concern over freedom of expression and due process.
Previously, the power to request such content removals rested primarily with select officials from the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) or the Information and Broadcasting Ministry. However, the 2023 update expanded this authority to include thousands of officials across multiple departments, who can now order removals based on any legal grounds, including public order and national security.
Between March 2024 and June 2025, over 1,400 removal requests were reportedly issued through Sahyog, with more than 70 percent originating from the Cybercrime Coordination Centre under the Ministry of Home Affairs. Many of these orders targeted satire, political criticism, and even news reports about a deadly stampede, raising alarm among free speech advocates.
In its legal arguments, X maintains that the new system is unconstitutional and that the Sahyog portal allows unwarranted censorship with minimal transparency. A lawyer representing X in court argued that the process gives far too much discretionary power to government officials. This criticism was met with strong rebuttals from India’s Solicitor General, who defended the portal as a necessary tool for combating misinformation and maintaining digital order.
The Indian government has countered the lawsuit with a detailed 92-page filing, accusing X of becoming a breeding ground for hate speech and misinformation. Authorities cited numerous examples of posts they claim violated Indian laws, including ones containing graphic content or unverified allegations. The government has maintained that other social media platforms are cooperating with the Sahyog system, whereas X has refused to join what it terms a “censorship portal.”
Despite this clash, Musk’s broader business ties with India remain intact. He has expressed strong interest in investing in Indian markets through Tesla and Starlink, referring to India as one of the most promising countries for future growth. The legal dispute over censorship, however, could become a significant test for Musk’s dual role as a free speech advocate and a global entrepreneur.
The outcome of this case could set an important precedent, not only for India’s digital governance but also for how multinational tech firms respond to expanding censorship regimes worldwide. As the court deliberates, the battle between Musk’s X and the Modi government is being closely watched by industry leaders, rights activists, and global policymakers alike.