Social Media Users Must Receive Copy of Government Blocking Orders: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court Orders Meta to Restore Blocked Media Page Within 24 Hours

Social media users targeted for government content blocking must receive a copy of the official intimation immediately after it goes to the intermediary, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled. Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya held that disclosing blocking orders is essential to uphold the principles of natural justice and make platform grievance mechanisms meaningful, livelaw.in reported. The ruling stems from a petition filed by Haryana 24 News Network Private Limited after Meta Platforms Inc. blocked its verified Facebook page in India on August 21, 2026, pursuant to a police communication.

High Court Sets Aside Unauthorized Blocking Order Issued by Yamuna Nagar Police

The blocking action originated from an intimation issued by the Superintendent of Police in Yamuna Nagar. The State defended the takedown by arguing that a company director, Mohit Verma, faced criminal accusations under FIR No. 353 registered on August 6, 2026, under Section 308(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, for allegedly using the page to intimidate witnesses. However, the High Court found that the Superintendent of Police lacked the legal authority to issue the directive. Under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, such intimations must come from an authorized officer not below the rank of a Deputy Inspector General of Police. Because the police bypassed this mandatory rank requirement, the High Court declared the intimation without jurisdiction and ordered Meta to restore the Facebook page to its original status within 24 hours of receiving a certified copy of the order.

Natural Justice Requires Pre-Grievance Disclosure of Government Intimations

The High Court rejected the State’s argument that the media company should simply use Meta’s internal grievance redressal mechanism under Rule 3(2) of the 2021 IT Rules to seek page restoration. Justice Dahiya observed that an effective post-decisional hearing before an intermediary grievance officer requires the affected user to know the specific grounds, contents, and underlying material of the blocking notice. Hindustantimes.com noted that while the 2021 rules do not explicitly mandate notifying the user before sending an intimation to an intermediary under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, the obligation to furnish a copy of the intimation is inherently ingrained in natural justice and must be read into the rules.

Key Details of the October 2026 Judicial Decision

• Case Title: Haryana 24 News Network Private Limited v. Union of India and Others (CWP No. 30190 of 2026)
• Date of Decision: October 5, 2026
• Presiding Judge: Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya
• Primary Statutes: Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000; Rule 3 of the IT Rules, 2021
• Court Action: Intimation set aside; Facebook page directed to be restored within 24 hours

Frequently Asked Questions About the Social Media Blocking Ruling

Why did the High Court rule against the police intimation?

The Court found that the Superintendent of Police in Yamuna Nagar held a rank below the Deputy Inspector General threshold mandated by the 2021 IT Rules for issuing authorized content-blocking directions to intermediaries.

What must authorities do if they target future content for removal?

The High Court ruled that any future intimation issued by an authorized officer to a social media intermediary must be furnished to the affected user immediately after transmission.

Can intermediaries process blocking requests without notifying users?

Intermediaries may receive blocking notices under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, but the judgment establishes that withholding the underlying intimation from the user destroys their right to a fair defense through grievance redressal.

More on Social Media: Australia Prepares Legal Action Against 5 Social Media Giants Over Under-16 Ban Violations · Court Upholds Florida Teen Social Media Ban Law Enforcement · Legal Risks of Sharing News on Social Media Under Decree 367/2026/ND-CP