Fayaz Abdul Majid Girach v. Union Of India & ANR.

$~87 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 5121/2026 & CM APPL. 25097/2026 FAYAZ ABDUL MAJID GIRACH .....Petitioner Through:

Mr.

Apar Gupta, Ms.

Avanti Deshpande, Mr. Naman Kumar and Ms. Indumugi C., Advs.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, CGSC with Ms. Usha Jamnal, ⁠Ms.

Nyasa Sharma, and ⁠Mr. Ankit Khatri, Advs. for R-1.

Mr. Ankit Parhar, Mr. Tejpal Singh Rathore, Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Ms.

Tanish Gupta and Ms. Sanchli Sethi, Advs. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

O R D E R

% 17.04.2026 CM APPL. 25098/2026 & CM APPL. 25099/2026 1.

Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2.

Applications stand disposed of.

W.P.(C) 5121/2026 & CM APPL. 25097/2026 3.

The instant petition has been filed seeking following reliefs: "a. Issue a direction to Respondent No. 1 & 2 for restoring/stop withholding the account of the Petitioner on the platform X, bearing the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

handle "@Polytikles" within the territory of India; b. Issue a writ, direction or order Respondent No.1 to produce the Blocking Order issued under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 along with all supporting material before this Hon'ble Court; and c. Issue a writ, direction, or order to ensure that any censorship by Respondent No. 1 or 2 with regards to the Petitioner is carried out strictly in accordance with provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Rules framed thereunder, namely the 8 & 9 of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 and in conformity with the fundamental rights and freedom guaranteed under Article 14, 19(l)(a) and 21 under Part III of the Indian Constitution, insofar as the same pertains to the Petitioner; and d. Pass such other or further writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

3.

The petitioner claims to be operating X account. The petitioner is aggrieved by the suspension of his account purportedly under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 ("IT Act"). 4.

During the course of hearing, Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, learned CGSC appearing on behalf of the respondent points out that for the process of identity verification, the petitioner was requested to appear for personal hearing before the Inter-Ministerial Committee on 22.04.2026 at 3:00 PM at the designated place.

5.

It has been given to understand that the respondents are extending an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner for examination of offending Uniform Resource Locator ("URL") in question. The petitioner has also been granted liberty to place on record submissions, documents or representations, if any.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

6.

It is thus seen that controversy involved here stands covered by the direction passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 4696/2026 titled Sandeep Singh vs. Union of India & Anr. dated 13.04.2026. The Court in the said writ petition had taken note of the earlier decisions in the case of Prateek Sharma v. Union of India & Ors.1, Kumar Nayan v. Union of India & Anr.2 and Shilpa Kumari vs. Union of India & Ors3. 7.

Having considered the submissions made by the parties, the instant petition stands disposed of with the following directions: (i) Let the petitioner to appear before the Inter-Ministerial Committee on the date and time as stated hereunder. On petitioner's appearance, let the said Committee to point out the alleged objectionable / offending material posted by petitioner on his X account.

(ii) Let the Inter-Ministerial Committee to inform the intermediary to temporarily block / suspend the alleged objectionable / offending material and upon compliance with the same, let the petitioner's X account be restored.

(iii) Let further action concerning the lis as also the content of the petitioner's X account be subject to final adjudication and the order to be passed by the Inter-Ministerial Committee. (iv) The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) shall be at liberty to monitor the material posted on the petitioner's X account and in case any objectionable material is posted, 1 W.P. (C) 4070 of 2026; order dated 06.04.2026 2 W.P. (C) 4377 of 2026; order dated 06.04.2026 3 W.P.(C) 4651/2026; order dated 08.04.2026 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

then it shall be at liberty to take appropriate recourse in accordance with law.

8.

With these observations, the instant petition along with pending application stands disposed of.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J APRIL 17, 2026/SH/ss The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.