Delhi HC grills Twitter for not blocking users posting objectionable content on Hindu gods

New Delhi, 29: Grilling social media giant, Delhi high court slammed Twitter for not voluntarily taking action against a notorious account that allegedly published "blasphemous and objectionable” content on Hindu gods and goddesses.

 

 

The court grilled the social media giant while hearing a writ petition filed by Aditya Singh Deshwal, against the allegedly obnoxious posts on Maa Kaali by user 'AtheistRepublic'. In a petition, Deshwal had told the court that despite several complaints, Twitter had never suspended or removed “offendable content” posted by the Twitter user.

 

During a hearing, a division bench comprising acting Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla questioned twitter why it could not block the account of the habitual offender.

 

After which Twitter said that users posted all kinds of content and it cannot block their accounts. Hearing that a bench of acting chief justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice Navin Chawla come down hard on Twitter saying, "If this is the logic then why they have blocked Trump's account."

 

 

 

The court said, “If this is the logic then why have you blocked Trump? It is ultimately boiling down to this, people you feel sensitive about, you will block them. You are not bothered about the sentiments and religion of other people in the world. We dare say, if it were a thing done for any other religion, you would be much more sensitive.”

 

Twitter, in its defence, argued that it had taken action against the said handle in compliance with the court’s orders, however, it had not disabled the account permanently.

 

The court said, “If Twitter has removed the content that is the admission that the content is offensive so you have a grievance against Twitter. The new rules empower the court. We have seen the material and we have no doubt that it is offensive and you could be prohibited.”

 

The bench then directed Twitter to file an explanation of its policy regarding a permanent ban on an account. The court directed the Centre to examine the content in the present case and decide if an action for blocking the account is called for under the Information Technology Act.

 

The court further directed Twitter, the central government as well as AtheistRepublic to file their response to the petitioner and took on record the Twitter user's undertaking that in the meantime, it would not post any similar offending material.

.

.