HC order to restore 'Dr Nimo Yadav' X account validates govt's content-blocking process -- MeitY officials

But ministry officials said that while the account had been unblocked, the Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) would examine the legality of specific content under the IT Act and Rules. The petitioner had been directed to appear before the committee and participate in the review process. A ministry official said on condition of anonymity that the court had "validated the process under which government blocks access to unlawful digital content". The official added that the court has made it clear that the "objectionable tweets will remain blocked/suspended pending adjudication by the Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC)." The official said the relief granted by the court was limited. "The court has simply granted a relief of unblocking of the account," the official said. "The court has left the matter ultimately to the IMC to examine the legality of content under the IT Act and Rules. The IMC will decide the future course of action after hearing the petitioner," the official added. "It is clear that objectionable and unlawful content can't be allowed on social media -- that's not freedom of speech," an official said. The case stems from an 18 March order in which MeitY directed the withholding of 12 X accounts in India under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. One of those accounts was "@DrNimoYadav," a satirical handle operated by Prateek Sharma, with approximately 13.56 lakh followers. The government's blocking order stated that the account contained defamatory posts involving photographs, videos and AI-manipulated content of the prime minister used to create controversial posts questioning the government and defaming the PM. It added that such content could affect public order and lead to internal security concerns. The order explicitly cited AI-manipulated content as a ground, notable as the government had already notified rules on synthetic and AI-generated content under the IT Amendment Rules 2026, which came into force on 20 February, 2026. Section 69A blocking orders are confidential by default. Sharma came to know of the order only when X notified him that his account had been withheld, without providing reasons. He then approached the Delhi High Court seeking production of the order and restoration of his account.