Sumant retweeted
#FoE #censorship #India #socmed #Meta #Instagram
There can be no proactive monitoring requirement under Section 79(3)(b). Check para 117 of Shreya Singhal v. Union of India. The government cannot call for proactive monitoring under the guise of "enhanced diligence".
ALT 3. Meta Platforms, being an intermediary as defined under the Information Technology Act, 2000, are required to observe due diligence and other obligations prescribed under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (IT Rules, 2021). The Rules, inter alia, require intermediaries to inform users regarding information which is prohibited under the Rules, including information which is likely to cause public disorder or incite the commission of a cognizable offence relating to public order. In view of the above, Meta is advised to exercise enhanced diligence in relation to content being surfaced, recommended or amplified through its feed and recommendation systems, particularly during periods of heightened public-order sensitivity. Particular attention may be accorded to content which: a. presents old, unrelated or selectively edited visuals as depicting current events; b. contains unverified or misleading claims regarding the imposi
ALT 117. Section 79(3)(b) has to be read down to mean that the intermediary upon receiving actual knowledge that a court order has been passed asking it to expeditiously remove or disable access to certain material must then fail to expeditiously remove or disable access to that material. This is for the reason that otherwise it would be very difficult for intermediaries like Google, Facebook etc. to act when millions of requests are made and the intermediary is then to judge as to which of such requests are legitimate and which are not. We have been informed that in other countries worldwide this view has gained acceptance, Argentina being in the forefront. Also, the Court order and/or the notification by the appropriate Government or its agency must strictly conform to the subject matters laid down in Article 19(2). Unlawful acts beyond what is laid down in Article 19(2) obviously cannot form any part of Section 79. With these two caveats, we refrain from striking down Section 79(3)(b).
MeitY's advisory to Meta directs the suppression of protest reporting on Instagram and Facebook. It must be withdrawn.
19 Oct 2026
On 10 October 2026, the Cyber Laws Division of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology issued an advisory to Meta Platforms bearing File No. 6(2)/2026-Cyberlaws. It was not published on the MEITY website and first HT and then PTI reported it on 18 October. Any such advisory is not a legal order and MEITY is not legally empowered to issue them on the basis of any statutory provision. This advisory followed, by two days, an advisory of 8 October to all social media intermediaries calling for "enhanced diligence" over content on "ongoing public events", asking platforms to "label or add context" to misleading content and to "give priority to complaints from authorised Government agencies". IFF called for the withdrawal of that advisory on 9 October. The Meta advisory was issued on the day the Delhi Police detained protesters and journalists at the demonstrations called over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
The advisory states that content relating to "public-order and law and order situations" is being "prominently displayed and recommended" on Meta's platforms and, "when presented without adequate context or disproportionately amplified", "may contribute to public confusion, apprehension and disturbance of public order and social tranquillity". It singles out "unverified or misleading claims regarding the imposition of emergency, restrictions, police action or other official measures". Further, Meta is advised to review its "recommendation and content ranking mechanisms", to ensure its systems "do not result in disproportionate exposure of users to a single or limited set of narratives", and to furnish "information or assistance" to law enforcement, "with immediate effect". PTI reports that the Ministry acted on inputs from "agencies" that Meta's platforms were not promoting all "narratives" equally.
This advisory matches restrictions on META platforms related to protest content and reporting in the same timline. On 10 October, the Instagram account of Molitics India was withheld in India. On 11 October, a Mathrubhumi English reel showing a woman clinging to a pole as police officers attempted to detain her was restricted citing, "a notice from the Government of India/Law Enforcement", and a video report by Observer Post Hindi was restricted on Facebook by what Meta called an "automated system" acting under the IT Rules, 2021. On 12 October, the Instagram account of journalist Shubhangi Das Gupta was restricted in India for alleged non-compliance with "local IT Rules". On 13 October, the account of Journo Mirror (about five lakh followers) was withheld. The account of Fridays For Future India has since been withheld without any stated reason. Meta's notices to these users do not disclose what is unlawful about the content.
As per notices shared by us by those who have been censored by META, they take two forms:
1. "a notice from the Government of India/Law Enforcement under Section 79(3)(b)", and,
2. "through an automated system implemented pursuant to legal requirements under India's Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules".
Neither names the issuing agency, the order, the provision of law or offence the content is said to disclose, or the URL complained of. We know due to litigation that the first notice related to a Sahyog order issued by a Law Enforcement Agency (LEA), while the second one is without any legal order. At the same time, several users received no communication at all. Instagram used the same "automated system" notice against Anjali Priya, Varnika Dhawan and Sachin Gupta after the July protests, and against cartoonist Satish Acharya, who lost nine cartoons and then his account between February and September 2026.
In April 2026, The Hindu reported that Meta automatically restricts government and police flagged content in India at scale, and seeks a separate government direction before restoring content later found to be legally unsupported. IFF objected to Meta on 4 May 2026. IFF condemns the advisory of 10 October and the restrictions imposed in its wake. An executive communication that instructs a platform to suppress "unverified" claims about "police action" and to correct a "limited set of narratives", issued on the day of a police crackdown and kept from the public, is a censorship directive in all but name. It makes the State the editor of what Indians may see of a protest against the State. IFF calls upon MeitY to withdraw it and upon Meta to disclose what it has done under it.
Our demands
1. MeitY must withdraw the advisories of 8 and 10 October 2026 forthwith and publish them.
2. MeitY must abandon proposed Rule 3(4) and restrict content only by reasoned, published orders under Section 69A or notices compliant with Rule 3(1)(d).
3. Meta must disclose every takedown, account restriction and act of downranking carried out under the advisories, and its compliance report to the Ministry.
4. Meta must restore the accounts and posts of journalists, outlets and creators restricted since 8 October 2026 unless it holds a valid legal order, and must furnish that order to the person affected.
5. Meta must suspend the automated restriction of content in India and disclose on what inputs its "automated system" acts.
Any person whose account or content has been withheld in India since 8 October 2026 may write to IFF at [email protected]. IFF is providing assistance pro bono.
Sumant retweeted
MeitY's advisory to Meta directs the suppression of protest reporting on Instagram and Facebook. It must be withdrawn.
19 Oct 2026
On 10 October 2026, the Cyber Laws Division of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology issued an advisory to Meta Platforms bearing File No. 6(2)/2026-Cyberlaws. It was not published on the MEITY website and first HT and then PTI reported it on 18 October. Any such advisory is not a legal order and MEITY is not legally empowered to issue them on the basis of any statutory provision. This advisory followed, by two days, an advisory of 8 October to all social media intermediaries calling for "enhanced diligence" over content on "ongoing public events", asking platforms to "label or add context" to misleading content and to "give priority to complaints from authorised Government agencies". IFF called for the withdrawal of that advisory on 9 October. The Meta advisory was issued on the day the Delhi Police detained protesters and journalists at the demonstrations called over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.
The advisory states that content relating to "public-order and law and order situations" is being "prominently displayed and recommended" on Meta's platforms and, "when presented without adequate context or disproportionately amplified", "may contribute to public confusion, apprehension and disturbance of public order and social tranquillity". It singles out "unverified or misleading claims regarding the imposition of emergency, restrictions, police action or other official measures". Further, Meta is advised to review its "recommendation and content ranking mechanisms", to ensure its systems "do not result in disproportionate exposure of users to a single or limited set of narratives", and to furnish "information or assistance" to law enforcement, "with immediate effect". PTI reports that the Ministry acted on inputs from "agencies" that Meta's platforms were not promoting all "narratives" equally.
This advisory matches restrictions on META platforms related to protest content and reporting in the same timline. On 10 October, the Instagram account of Molitics India was withheld in India. On 11 October, a Mathrubhumi English reel showing a woman clinging to a pole as police officers attempted to detain her was restricted citing, "a notice from the Government of India/Law Enforcement", and a video report by Observer Post Hindi was restricted on Facebook by what Meta called an "automated system" acting under the IT Rules, 2021. On 12 October, the Instagram account of journalist Shubhangi Das Gupta was restricted in India for alleged non-compliance with "local IT Rules". On 13 October, the account of Journo Mirror (about five lakh followers) was withheld. The account of Fridays For Future India has since been withheld without any stated reason. Meta's notices to these users do not disclose what is unlawful about the content.
As per notices shared by us by those who have been censored by META, they take two forms:
1. "a notice from the Government of India/Law Enforcement under Section 79(3)(b)", and,
2. "through an automated system implemented pursuant to legal requirements under India's Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules".
Neither names the issuing agency, the order, the provision of law or offence the content is said to disclose, or the URL complained of. We know due to litigation that the first notice related to a Sahyog order issued by a Law Enforcement Agency (LEA), while the second one is without any legal order. At the same time, several users received no communication at all. Instagram used the same "automated system" notice against Anjali Priya, Varnika Dhawan and Sachin Gupta after the July protests, and against cartoonist Satish Acharya, who lost nine cartoons and then his account between February and September 2026.
In April 2026, The Hindu reported that Meta automatically restricts government and police flagged content in India at scale, and seeks a separate government direction before restoring content later found to be legally unsupported. IFF objected to Meta on 4 May 2026. IFF condemns the advisory of 10 October and the restrictions imposed in its wake. An executive communication that instructs a platform to suppress "unverified" claims about "police action" and to correct a "limited set of narratives", issued on the day of a police crackdown and kept from the public, is a censorship directive in all but name. It makes the State the editor of what Indians may see of a protest against the State. IFF calls upon MeitY to withdraw it and upon Meta to disclose what it has done under it.
Our demands
1. MeitY must withdraw the advisories of 8 and 10 October 2026 forthwith and publish them.
2. MeitY must abandon proposed Rule 3(4) and restrict content only by reasoned, published orders under Section 69A or notices compliant with Rule 3(1)(d).
3. Meta must disclose every takedown, account restriction and act of downranking carried out under the advisories, and its compliance report to the Ministry.
4. Meta must restore the accounts and posts of journalists, outlets and creators restricted since 8 October 2026 unless it holds a valid legal order, and must furnish that order to the person affected.
5. Meta must suspend the automated restriction of content in India and disclose on what inputs its "automated system" acts.
Any person whose account or content has been withheld in India since 8 October 2026 may write to IFF at [email protected]. IFF is providing assistance pro bono.
Sumant retweeted
India doesn’t have an unemployment crisis.
It has an employability crisis.
And colleges are producing lakhs of graduates who are literate, obedient, and utterly lost.
Sumant retweeted
पहले किसी लड़की को ‘कॉल गर्ल’ और ‘प्रॉस्टिट्यूट’ बोलो, न्यूज़ चलाओ; जब विरोध किया जाये तो ‘सॉरी’ बोल दो! तमाशा बना दिये हो?
तुम्हारी इस ‘फेक न्यूज़’ और बड़ी दलाली पाने की कोशिश ने मेरी क्या मानसिक हालत कर दी है इसका अंदाज़ा है तुमको?
कोर्ट में मुलाक़ात होगी. मुझे न्याय चाहिये माफ़ी नहीं.
@ABPNews
Sumant retweeted
Is Sabarmati Central Jail a prison or the gang headquarters of Lawrence Bishnoi Sahab?
Sumant retweeted
“Lawrence Bishnoi Sahab”
The respect Delhi Police has for gangsters…
Wish they showed even 10% of this courtesy to students and activists who are doing nothing but protest.
Sumant retweeted
Update!!
Mumbai police has detained Sahil Wakode’s parents, they brutally handled students. Women protestors were dragged, touched on private parts, and beaten by police. Calling lawyers and activist to assemble at Sakinaka PS
Sumant retweeted
Can questions about the Election Commission be answered with police force?
Cyrus Broacha (@Broacha_Cyrus) criticises the treatment of young protesters raising concerns about the CEC and the electoral process.
He argues that democratic disagreements require dialogue, accountability and compromise, not intimidation.
Watch the full conversation on DeKoder: youtube.com/watch?v=6uarSAFm…
#GyaneshKumar #ECI #DelhiPolice #RightToProtest #FreedomOfSpeech
Sumant retweeted
देश के प्रति खुला द्रोह है! क्या यह बिना योजना के हुआ है! अपराधी कहां कहां से एकत्र किए गए! क्या माननीय सुप्रीम कोर्ट जांच करेगा? – at Noida, India
Where did all the garbage go?
we transformed the most dirtiest garbage dump in bangalore to a footpath with the great tiranga flag and HAL tejas on the walls, in less than 10 days.
a lot of you have asked to share what steps did we take to make this happen so @arunpaiblrwalks and i made a video about it.
this was a joint effort between @GBA_office and civilians.
Sumant retweeted
NO PERMISSION TO THINK. NO PERMISSION TO SPEAK. NO PERMISSION TO PROTEST? THAT IS NOT DEMOCRACY!
A powerful message from Lawtinum: peaceful protest is a fundamental democratic right, not a favour bestowed by those in power.
Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Indian Constitution protect freedom of speech and expression and the right to assemble peacefully and without arms.
The Supreme Court has recognised peaceful demonstrations as a fundamental right. Reasonable restrictions for public order are permissible, but authorities cannot use regulation as a pretext to extinguish legitimate dissent. "indianexpress.com/article/ex…" (indianexpress.com/article/ex…)
THE QUESTION IS NOT WHETHER CITIZENS SHOULD OBEY THE LAW. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THE AUTHORITIES ARE ALSO UPHOLDING THE CONSTITUTION.
When citizens raise uncomfortable questions, the answer should be transparency, dialogue and accountability—not arbitrary suppression.
Watch, share and discuss this legal perspective. Let us defend the right to peaceful dissent and demand that restrictions on protest be justified, proportionate and open to independent judicial scrutiny.
🎥 Source: Lawtinum — “You Don't Require Permission to Protest”
threads.com/share/BAKkMCgJo6…
#DimaagiNaxal #Resistance #UnitedResistance
Sumant retweeted
रक्षा क्षेत्र में बड़ा खेल?
इंडियन एक्सप्रेस पीछे नहीं हट रहा है।
सेना में भ्रष्टाचार?
BDL की स्थापना सिद्धार्थ मिश्रा ने की थी।
Sumant retweeted
He’s also got the wrong flag for a Sanghi! He coild get detained in Sanghi India for carrying that flag!
Sumant retweeted
So , they arrested a random security guard , who was most likely a contractual worker at a Pujo Pandal which was seeing thousands of visitors each day without provision for safe exits , but NOT the nephew of CM Shubhendu , who is the head of fucking pujo committee !!
Sumant retweeted
How have you missed the number one cause? Nobody is burning anything in Mumbai, were #building with concrete, transporting debris and lying about the construction-caused AQI & pm2.5 with impunity. @ku1deep this has been acknowledged by @mybmc & the courts, it's not up for debate
Lots of people are asking where the haze over Mumbai is coming from, and nobody seems to have a good answer. Let me try.
First, this isn’t surprising. October usually means an AQI of 110 to 140 in Mumbai, and that’s been true for most years since 2020, which is as far back as my data goes. See Fig 1. It gets worse in November and peaks in January.
What you actually need to understand is where that high number comes from. US AQI is the air quality index used by the EPA, the US environmental agency. It looks at six pollutants. It turns each pollutant’s level into a score from 0 to 500 using a fixed table of cutoffs, and the highest of those scores becomes the AQI. The cutoffs are different for each pollutant, and they can change. The EPA made the PM2.5 cutoffs stricter in 2024.
India has its own index, the National AQI from the CPCB, and its cutoffs are bullshit. PM2.5 at 60 µg/m³ is “Satisfactory” on the Indian scale and “Unhealthy” on the US scale. Whatever app you use, check which AQI it’s showing you.
Now, why does Mumbai have haze, and why is the AQI so high? It’s PM2.5. Look at the orange line in Fig 2. PM2.5 is nasty stuff. The particles are fine enough to go deep into your lungs and fuck them up. It mostly comes from burning things, e.g., waste, vehicle exhaust, and industry. It’s mostly not from construction, which mainly produces the coarser PM10. Fig 3 shows PM10 falling and PM2.5 not falling. Last winter PM10 was the lowest it’s been, and the new construction dust rules probably helped with that. PM2.5 went up anyway.
The haze you see isn’t a good guide. Fine particles do scatter light, and humid, cooler air makes the haze thicker. But you can have heavy haze without much pollution, and you can have high PM2.5 with a clear sky. Trust a monitor, not the view out your window.
Sadly there’s no easy way to protect yourself from PM2.5. Your best bets are a well-fitted N95 mask outdoors and an air purifier at home. If someone is burning stuff near your place, that’s a big part of your problem, so shut the windows on that side.
Oh, and by the way, this probably isn’t because Mumbai has more cars. Fig 4 plots the growth in vehicles over the last few years against PM2.5. More cars have given us an NO2 problem, but they don’t explain the swings in particulate matter. The main cause seems to be somewhere else. Find out where things are being burned.
Sumant retweeted
Lots of people are asking where the haze over Mumbai is coming from, and nobody seems to have a good answer. Let me try.
First, this isn’t surprising. October usually means an AQI of 110 to 140 in Mumbai, and that’s been true for most years since 2020, which is as far back as my data goes. See Fig 1. It gets worse in November and peaks in January.
What you actually need to understand is where that high number comes from. US AQI is the air quality index used by the EPA, the US environmental agency. It looks at six pollutants. It turns each pollutant’s level into a score from 0 to 500 using a fixed table of cutoffs, and the highest of those scores becomes the AQI. The cutoffs are different for each pollutant, and they can change. The EPA made the PM2.5 cutoffs stricter in 2024.
India has its own index, the National AQI from the CPCB, and its cutoffs are bullshit. PM2.5 at 60 µg/m³ is “Satisfactory” on the Indian scale and “Unhealthy” on the US scale. Whatever app you use, check which AQI it’s showing you.
Now, why does Mumbai have haze, and why is the AQI so high? It’s PM2.5. Look at the orange line in Fig 2. PM2.5 is nasty stuff. The particles are fine enough to go deep into your lungs and fuck them up. It mostly comes from burning things, e.g., waste, vehicle exhaust, and industry. It’s mostly not from construction, which mainly produces the coarser PM10. Fig 3 shows PM10 falling and PM2.5 not falling. Last winter PM10 was the lowest it’s been, and the new construction dust rules probably helped with that. PM2.5 went up anyway.
The haze you see isn’t a good guide. Fine particles do scatter light, and humid, cooler air makes the haze thicker. But you can have heavy haze without much pollution, and you can have high PM2.5 with a clear sky. Trust a monitor, not the view out your window.
Sadly there’s no easy way to protect yourself from PM2.5. Your best bets are a well-fitted N95 mask outdoors and an air purifier at home. If someone is burning stuff near your place, that’s a big part of your problem, so shut the windows on that side.
Oh, and by the way, this probably isn’t because Mumbai has more cars. Fig 4 plots the growth in vehicles over the last few years against PM2.5. More cars have given us an NO2 problem, but they don’t explain the swings in particulate matter. The main cause seems to be somewhere else. Find out where things are being burned.
Sumant retweeted
There is no way Gyanesh and gang can be allowed to continue running the ECI and hold polls.
Sumant retweeted
A blow by blow account of Mumbai Police surrounding NGO premises in Mumbai's Vakola area in Santacruz East and not allowing young students to leave premises because they feel they will participate in a protest.
Whats going on? Is being young a crime in new India?
Sumant retweeted
Tiger Shroff's car gets shot up in Mumbai, and the man who ordered it is sitting comfortably in Sabarmati Jail, Gujarat, under Amit Shah’s protection.
Here's the documented scandal nobody in TV news will say plainly:
Mumbai Police asked for Bishnoi's physical custody. Denied, because MHA under Amit Shah invoked CrPC Section 268(1) to block the transfer. That order wasn't a one-off. It was extended. Repeatedly.
A gangster who has claimed responsibility for the Salman Khan threat, the Sidhu Moosewala murder conspiracy, and now Tiger Shroff's shooting; is being shielded from every state police agency that wants to interrogate him, by the Union Home Ministry.
This is not negligence. Negligence is accidental. This is a pattern: a gangster transferred OUT of Tihar (where NIA and Delhi Police had access) INTO a Gujarat jail (where nobody gets access), and then a Section 268 wall erected around him so no state can touch him.
Under whose watch does a jailed man run an international criminal enterprise with operatives in Canada, the US, and on Mumbai streets? Amit Shah's watch. He is the Home Minister. The buck stops with him; not with Maharashtra Police, not with Punjab, not with Rahul Gandhi.
The question Modi-Shah's media shields won't ask: if Lawrence Bishnoi is so dangerous that he can't be transferred, why is he not in a high-security NIA facility with zero phone access; instead of a jail from which he apparently runs press statements and shooting orders?
What exactly is the arrangement between the Modi government and Lawrence Bishnoi that makes his Gujarat custody so... convenient?
