The Delhi High Court on 6 November 2026 disposed of writ petitions filed by the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) and the Software Freedom Law Centre India (SFLC.in) after X Corp informed the bench that two 'Illegal Content Reports' submitted in the name of the Delhi Police were fake. The court, hearing W.P.(C) 16671/2026 and a connected petition, recorded the statement made on behalf of X Corp and granted the petitioners liberty to approach the court afresh should any action be initiated against their accounts or posts based on the impugned reports.
Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal appeared for both IFF and SFLC.in. The petitions challenged two reports submitted to X Corp on 31 October and 2 November 2026 through the platform's public online reporting form. The first report, bearing reference LD-321926, and the second, LD-322956, identified the reporting officer as Hargobinder Singh Dhaliwal, Special Commissioner of Police (Crime), and provided a communication address of [email protected]. The reports sought the removal of specific posts, comments, reposts, and the entire X accounts of IFF (@internetfreedom), SFLC.in (@SFLCin), and @geoblockedindia.
The stated reason in the first report was that the posts were 'defamatory towards the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh under the Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS)'. The second report cited 'defamation and illegal content under Section 356 BNS' alongside allegations of hate speech and safety violations. Notably, the fields in the reporting form designated for the nature and details of a court order were left empty in both instances.
What did X Corp tell the Delhi High Court about the takedown reports?
X Corp submitted that an internal investigation revealed the email address used to submit the reports appeared to be fake. The platform informed the court that it had filed a complaint with the Delhi Police regarding the fraudulent submission and stated it was not likely to take any action on the reports at this stage.
The controversy originated with a legal notice dated 29 October 2026, sent from a Proton Mail address signed 'Advocate Gaurav Tiwari', claiming to act on instructions from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). The notice demanded that IFF, SFLC.in, and the operator of @geoblockedindia cease opposing government directions under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and stop documenting restricted content. IFF and SFLC.in responded that the notice was legally deficient, lacked an advocate's enrolment number, and cited no specific provision of law, asserting that their activities were protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.
A second notice from the same email address on 1 November 2026 falsely claimed the first notice had been declined and stated that requests for blocking the organisations' X accounts and initiating legal action had already been submitted on 31 October. Within minutes of that claim, the first takedown report was filed on X's platform at 8.06 pm on 31 October, followed by the second report on 2 November.
Upon X Corp's submission regarding the falsity of the reports and the filing of a police complaint, the court disposed of the petitions in those terms. The order effectively maintains the status quo, ensuring the petitioners' accounts and content remain unaffected by the challenged reports unless the court is approached again.