• Source:JND
Add as a preferred

The lawyer of Elon Musk's X has drawn criticism from both Centre and the Karnataka High Court judge after he addressed the government officials as 'Tom, Dick And Harry' during a hearing.

The lawyer said that if every “Tom, Dick and Harry” government official is authorised to send content takedown notices then it would amount to misuse of official powers.

The remarks were made when X Corp India, the Indian arm of the social media platform 'X' (formerly Twitter), informed the court that the Ministry of Railways recently sent them a notice seeking the removal of a video showing a woman driving a car on a railway track in Hyderabad.

During the hearing of arguments in a related case, X Corp India raised a question about whether every government official had the authority to issue content takedown notices under the Information Technology(IT) Act.

ALSO READ: Perplexity's AI Chatbot Can Now Create Videos On X, But Critics Warn Of Misinformation Risks

Senior Advocate K G Raghavan was representing X Corp India. While making his submissions, Raghavan argued against what he termed as a misuse of official powers.

"What if every Tom, Dick and Harry officer sends me notices? See how this is being misused," he said.

Raghavan also questioned whether the content in question qualified as unlawful. He said, "Some woman drove a car on railway tracks. Milords knows dog biting man is not news, but man biting dog is news."

Appearing for the government of India, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, vehemently objected to the choice of words. He said, "They are officers, not Tom, Dick and Harry. They are statutory functionaries with legal authority. International entities should not display such arrogance".

Mehta stressed that no social media platform should expect to operate without regulation. He also emphasised that the intermediaries follow laws in other countries and should do the same in India.

Justice M Nagaprasanna, who was hearing the case, also expressed disapproval of X counsel's remarks, affirming the stature of Union government officers and stating, "I take objection to this. They are officers of the Union of India."

X Corp has sought a judicial declaration that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act does not empower all government officials to issue blocking orders. The social media giant has argued that such orders must follow the procedure laid out in Section 69A of the Act, along with the relevant blocking rules.

Moreover, the company has also requested the high court to prevent ministries from taking coercive or adverse actions against it based on blocking orders not issued under the prescribed procedure.

Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi, who was representing an association of digital media houses that filed an intervention application, said that when a content take-down order is issued, it directly affects content creators.

ALSO READ: Karnataka: Ban On Bike Taxi Services Begins In Bengaluru, Other Cities; Association Writes To CM, Rahul Gandhi

When the bench questioned about the association's role in the matter between the government and X, Sondhi responded that takedown orders impact their published material.

However, Mehta objected to the intervention and stated that X Corp is a capable international firm and does not need third-party support. "I object to any third-party application filed in support of Twitter," he added.

The bench scheduled the matter for final hearing on July 8 and permitted X Corp to amend its petition to include various Union ministries.

(With PTI Inputs)

Also In News