Madras High Court Defends Digital Free Speech, Stays TN Police Order Blocking Political Posts on X

The Madras High Court recently delivered a significant ruling on digital free speech while staying a Tamil Nadu Cyber Crime Wing notice that sought blocking of multiple posts on X (formerly Twitter). The case was filed by P. Chockalingam, who challenged the legality of a notice issued under Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act and the 2021 IT Rules. The impugned notice directed removal of several URLs containing political criticism, commentary, satire and dissent concerning contemporary political developments in Tamil Nadu.

A Division Bench comprising Justice L. Victoria Gowri and Justice N. Senthilkumar observed that vague and omnibus censorship orders cannot be used to silence democratic criticism. The Court strongly remarked that “political sensitivity cannot be the measure of constitutional permissibility,” emphasizing that criticism, satire, disagreement and robust public debate are protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Referring to the landmark judgment in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, the Bench reiterated that only speech amounting to incitement can justify State interference.

The Court found that the blocking notice lacked individualized reasoning, failed to explain how each post violated Article 19(2), and imposed an unreasonable three-hour compliance window without disclosing any emergency. Holding that free speech restrictions must satisfy legality, necessity and proportionality, the Court stayed the notice and directed restoration of the blocked URLs pending further proceedings.