The Supreme Court on August 17, 2026, passed an order allowing interim relief to the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) directing Meta to restore the Facebook and Instagram accounts of its Gujarat unit. The bench comprising Justice P. S. Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe heard the interlocutory application filed by AAP seeking restoration of its social media pages, which had been blocked on April 24, 2026, and remained suspended since April 25, 2026.
The court noted that the suspension of the accounts, '@aapgujarat' on Instagram and the corresponding Facebook page, had resulted in the blocking of a key communication channel for a national political party. The pages had cumulatively garnered over 10.39 lakh followers prior to their suspension. The bench observed that the blocking occurred ahead of local body elections in Gujarat and was linked to alleged copyright violations involving the unauthorized use of scenes and clips from Gujarati films in political campaign material.
Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the interim relief was necessary as the Union government had repeatedly sought adjournments in the matter. The bench, after noting the history of adjournments, including one instance when Solicitor General Tushar Mehta was engaged in another court, expressed impatience with the delays. Justice Narasimha remarked during the hearing, 'How many times will we adjourn this matter?' when an advocate sought yet another adjournment.
Despite the request for further delay, the court proceeded to hear the application and allowed the interim relief. The order passed by the bench directed Meta to restore the Instagram and Facebook accounts of AAP's Gujarat unit, subject to the condition that any objectionable posts be removed. The restoration was to take effect after a period of two weeks from the date of the order, allowing time for compliance with the condition.
The court clarified that the interim relief was conditional and did not amount to a final determination on the merits of the case. The main petition, filed by AAP, challenges the legal basis for the blocking of its social media accounts under Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The party contends that the provision does not confer authority on authorities to direct the blocking of information and seeks a declaration that all consequential rules and notifications issued under the provision, insofar as they relate to blocking of information, are void.
AAP has further sought quashing of the directions allegedly issued by law enforcement authorities to Meta for blocking or suspending its social media accounts. The petition calls for the production of records relating to the blocking directions and seeks a declaration that the action of blocking the '@aapgujarat' Instagram account and Facebook page is arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional, and violative of fundamental rights under the Constitution.
The party has also prayed for the formulation of guidelines and procedural safeguards governing the blocking or suspension of official social media accounts of registered political parties. It has urged the court to ensure that such action can only be taken after prior notice, an opportunity of hearing, and written reasons, and only in conformity with the grounds permissible under Article 19(2) of the Constitution read with Section 69A of the IT Act, which empowers the government to block access to online information under specified conditions including sovereignty and integrity of India, defence, security, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, or prevention of incitement to commission of a cognisable offence.
The matter is listed WP 576/2026, titled Aam Aadmi Party & Ors v. Union of India. The bench has not yet issued a final judgment on the substantive reliefs sought in the main petition. The interim order remains operative subject to compliance with the condition regarding removal of objectionable posts.