New Delhi, India  
Judiciary

Allahabad HC Pulls Up X For Non-Cooperation In Probe Into Obscene Content

By Samriddhi Ojha      5 hours ago      0 Comments
Allahabad HC Pulls Up X For Non Cooperation In Probe Into Obscene Content

Allahabad: The Allahabad High Court has come down heavily on X Corp, the company that operates the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), for its refusal to cooperate with a police investigation into the posting of obscene videos and photographs of the petitioner on the platform, holding that officials of the company had, prima facie, “stonewalled” the probe and allowed the accused to “cheat justice.”

A Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot and Justice Divesh Chandra Samant passed the order in a criminal misc. writ petition filed by Mithilesh Kumar, who had approached the Court seeking a mandamus directing the Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad, to ensure a fair and expeditious investigation into an FIR registered under Section 67-A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, at Police Station Indrapuram, Ghaziabad.

The petition, originally taken up on April 28, 2026 by a Bench of Justice Rajeev Misra and Justice Padam Narain Mishra, had complained that the investigation into the FIR, registered as Case Crime No. 1293 of 2025 and lodged on December 10, 2025, had not progressed for over four and a half months. Finding no explanation for what it called the “lackadaisical approach” of the investigating agency, that Bench had directed the concerned Circle Officer and Investigating Officer to appear in person with the original case diary and file personal affidavits explaining the delay.

Pursuant to that direction, Assistant Commissioner of Police Abhishek Srivastava and Investigating Officer Anil Kumar Verma appeared before a Bench of Justice Rajiv Gupta and Justice Dr. Ajay Kumar-II on May 6, 2026, and filed their affidavits. The learned A.G.A., on instructions, assured the Court that the investigation would be concluded within a month, failing which the officers would be required to appear again.

When the matter was next taken up on July 2, 2026, however, the investigating officer's affidavit, dated May 4, 2026,  disclosed that the investigation remained stalled because X Corp had not furnished the URL ID and IP address linked to the account from which the obscene material had been posted, despite the request having been addressed to the company's Trust & Safety Legal Policy division in San Francisco.

“Social media handles are not immune from accountability to Indian laws... The arms of the Indian law are long enough to reach any transgression and strong enough to bring the offenders to justice.”

The Court observed that the affidavit, on its face, amounted to an admission of policing failure, and that responsible officials of X appeared to have stonewalled the investigation while the police had abdicated their statutory duties, conduct that would, in the Court's words, enable the offenders to escape justice.

Taking a serious view of the non-cooperation, the Bench directed the Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad, to appear in person before the Court on the next date of listing and explain the steps taken to secure the cooperation of the concerned officials of X and to hold them accountable to the process of law. The Court also directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Secretary (Home), Government of Uttar Pradesh, and the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh. The matter has been listed for August 12, 2026, before the appropriate Bench, with the Court clarifying that it would not be treated as part-heard or tied up to the present Bench.

CASE DETAILS

Case Title: Mithilesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and 2 others

Case No.: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9325 of 2026

Court: Allahabad High Court

Bench (July 2, 2026 order): Justice Ajay Bhanot and Justice Divesh Chandra Samant

Bench (May 6, 2026 order): Justice Rajiv Gupta and Justice Dr. Ajay Kumar-II

Bench (April 28, 2026 order): Justice Rajeev Misra and Justice Padam Narain Mishra

Counsel for Petitioner: Rishi Kumar Prajapati, Virendra Kumar Maurya

Counsel for Respondents: Government Advocate / A.G.A.

Underlying FIR Case No. 1293 of 2025, under Section 67-A, Information Technology Act, 2000, P.S. Indrapuram, Ghaziabad, dated 10.12.2025

Next Listing: August 12, 2026

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 9325 of 2026



Share this article:

About:

Samriddhi is a legal scholar currently pursuing her LL.M. in Constitutional Law at the National Law ...Read more



Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land

SC bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi has allotted the dispute site to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, while directing the government to allot an alternate 5 acre land within Ayodhya to Sunni Waqf Board to build a mosque.

"No Loudspeakers For Azan, No Fundamental Right To Create Noise," Says Allahabad HC To Two Mosques [Read Judgment] "No Loudspeakers For Azan, No Fundamental Right To Create Noise," Says Allahabad HC To Two Mosques [Read Judgment]

Further reasoning of the court was based on consideration of the fact that a mixed population resides in that area, comprising Hindus and Muslims both, which lead to the tension between both the groups regarding the use of loudspeakers.

Allahabad High Court to Hear Ghazipur MPs Plea against Ban on Azaan Allahabad High Court to Hear Ghazipur MPs Plea against Ban on Azaan

Hence, although an ongoing religious practice, the use of loudspeakers in the performance of Azaan remains a debatable question.

There is NO minority in India currently: Former Justice SN Srivastava, Allahabad HC There is NO minority in India currently: Former Justice SN Srivastava, Allahabad HC

"Explore former Justice SN Srivastava's statement on the minority status in India, as he discusses the evolving dynamics of religious and cultural representation in the country.

Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email