X lawyer calls govt officials ‘Tom, Dick and Harry’ during hearing, Karnataka HC takes objection | Company Business News

The Karnataka High Court has objected to a lawyer for Elon Musk’s X’s calling government officials as “Tom, Dick and Harry”, when questioning misuse of power through content takedown notices, PTI reported.

While making arguments, Senior Advocate KG Raghavan, appearing for X told the court that the social media company had recently received a notice from the Ministry of Railways seeking the removal of a video showing a woman driving a car on a railway track in Hyderabad. He questioned whether every government official had the authority to issue content takedown notices under the Information Technology (IT) Act.

The Controversial Statement

“What if every Tom, Dick and Harry officer sends me notices? See how this is being misused,” Raghavan said and questioned whether such content qualified as unlawful, remarking, “Some woman drove a car on railway tracks. Milords knows dog biting man is not news, but man biting dog is news.”

After this, appearing for the government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, strongly objected to the language, saying: “They are officers, not Tom, Dick and Harry. They are statutory functionaries with legal authority. International entities should not display such arrogance.”

Mehta emphasised that no social media platform should expect to operate without regulation, noting that intermediaries follow laws in other countries and should do the same in India.

Court calls out statement

Karnataka HC Judge Justice M Nagaprasanna also expressed disapproval of the remarks, affirming the stature of central government officials. He said: “I take objection to this. They are officers of the Union of India.”

The court was hearing X Corp’s case seeking a judicial declaration that Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act does not empower all government officials to issue blocking orders, arguing that such orders must follow the procedure laid out in Section 69A of the Act, along with the relevant blocking rules.

Additionally, the company has requested the court to prevent government ministries from taking coercive or adverse actions against it based on blocking orders not issued in accordance with the prescribed procedure.

The case: X says take down orders affecting content creators

Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi, representing an association of digital media houses that filed an intervention application, said content creators are directly affected when platforms are ordered to take down content.

When the HC bench questioned how the association was aggrieved in a matter between the government and X, Sondhi responded that takedown orders impact their published material.

SG Mehta, however, objected to the intervention, stating that X is a capable international company and does not need third-party support. “I object to any third-party application filed in support of Twitter,” he added.

The bench scheduled the matter for final hearing on July 8 and permitted X Corp to amend its petition to include various Union ministries. The Union of India was directed to file its response to the impleading application before the next hearing.