The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) on Tuesday organised a workshop for officials from multiple central ministries, government departments, and several state governments to clarify the procedures and scope of issuing content takedown orders and notices under the Information Technology (IT) Act.
MeitY Secretary S Krishnan told HT that the workshop, titled ‘Management of Information on Intermediary Platforms’, aimed to guide ministries and departments on the correct application of sections 79(3)(b) and 69A of the Act. He said the initiative was prompted by instances where officials had made errors in wording or format while issuing takedown notices under Section 79(3)(b).
“Everyone uses the word ‘takedown’ very loosely. They [officers] need to say that if the intermediary doesn’t take it down, then so and so will be the consequences. That is very different from saying ‘you’re directed to take it down’. Sometimes they [officers] make mistakes so we just explained what the nuances were, and what they are supposed to say and not say,” Krishnan said.
It should be noted that section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act limits nodal officers and agencies to only notifying intermediaries (companies) about unlawful content on their platforms. These notices do not order content blocking but warn intermediaries that failing to comply could put their legal protection (safe harbor under section 79 of IT Act) at risk, with ultimate liability determined by courts. Along with Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, 2021, the provision allows central ministries, state governments, police officials, and agencies like the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre(I4C) and the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) to issue such notices. Hundreds, or even thousands, of officials collectively act as nodal officers empowered to send these notices.
{{/usCountry}}It should be noted that section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act limits nodal officers and agencies to only notifying intermediaries (companies) about unlawful content on their platforms. These notices do not order content blocking but warn intermediaries that failing to comply could put their legal protection (safe harbor under section 79 of IT Act) at risk, with ultimate liability determined by courts. Along with Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, 2021, the provision allows central ministries, state governments, police officials, and agencies like the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre(I4C) and the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) to issue such notices. Hundreds, or even thousands, of officials collectively act as nodal officers empowered to send these notices.
{{/usCountry}}Blocking requests, on the other hand, can only be issued under section 69A of the IT Act, and is issued only by MeitY. Section 69A allows the government to block or take down online content if it threatens things like national security, public order, or India’s relations with other countries.
An example of a notice issued by the railways ministry under section 79(3)(b) to ‘take down’ content came to light during the recent case of X Corp vs Union of India in Karnataka high court. The notice, issued to X, seen by HT, asked it to “take down” several links and URLs related to a video of a woman driving on railway tracks. The URLs included those of news channels and journalists.
The notice, dated June 26, 2025, read: “This is not only against the ethical norms but also against the content policy of x.com itself under suicide or self harm. As sharing of such video may also disrupt train operation or encourage self harm, it is categorically mentioned that the content showed in shared URLs/links (Attached in appendix-A) may be taken down immediately,”
MeitY joint secretary (cyber laws) Ajit Kumar noted during the Tuesday workshop that poorly drafted notices often face judicial challenges, underscoring the need for a standardized and comprehensive approach. Krishnan underlined that notices must include relevant legal references and be written clearly to avoid confusion and potential misuse.
Experts from I4C, department of legal affairs, Indian Army, and various ministries participated in the event. The discussions focused on the importance of using clear language, defining relevant legal provisions, and maintaining consistency in notices issued to online platforms.