The Delhi High Court has held that a writ petition seeking restoration of an Instagram account is not maintainable against Meta Platforms, in the case Sarthak Bhagat v Union of India and Others. Justice Amit Mahajan held that Meta does not perform a public function or discharge a public duty, which are the conditions necessary to maintain a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution, Bar and Bench reported.

Source: Bar and Bench

The Court said that while Instagram plays a significant role in disseminating information and shaping public opinion, its primary function is to provide a platform for expression, with public discourse being a consequence of its operations rather than a public duty. Its operations remain private in nature, and no governmental mandate delegates any traditional State function to it, the Court observed in its October 27 order, ANI reported.

Source: ANI via Indian Economic Observer

Civil Suit Is the Remedy, Court Says

Blocking of an Instagram account by Meta has to be challenged by way of a civil suit and not a writ petition, the Court said, adding that a writ of mandamus requires a clear demonstration of neglect of a statutory duty, which was not apparent in the case. It also declined relief against the Union of India on that ground.

Source: Bar and Bench

Bhagat had challenged the disabling of his Instagram accounts without prior notice or an opportunity to respond, after the platform told him his account had violated its community standards. He had also approached the Grievance Appellate Committee under Rule 3A of the IT Rules, 2021, with an appeal filed on September 11 that remained pending beyond the prescribed 30-day period, Bar and Bench reported. The Court directed the Committee to decide that appeal expeditiously.

Source: Bar and Bench