News agency Reuters’ primary X (formerly Twitter) account has been withheld in India. On Sunday, users in India attempting to access Reuters’ X account encountered a notice stating the handle had been “withheld in IN in response to a legal demand.”
The agency’s affiliate accounts, such as @ReutersTech and @ReutersFactCheck, remain accessible. Neither the Government of India nor X has publicly disclosed the grounds for the restriction, leaving the exact nature of the legal demand unclear.
Legal Framework
Under India’s Information Technology Act’s Section 69A, the Central Government, through an authorised officer designated by the Ministry of Electronics and IT to issue blocking orders against intermediaries for reasons including sovereignty, security of the State, public order or prevention of incitement to a cognisable offence.
The accompanying IT Rules of 2021 require platforms to disable access to the specified content within thirty‑six hours of receiving a valid order.
Only a court of competent jurisdiction or the authorised officer acting on behalf of the Central Government can issue a Section 69A blocking directive, which is typically routed through MeitY or the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
While individual users may lodge grievances over specific posts via X’s Grievance Officer, they cannot compel an account‑wide withholding, which remains the sole prerogative of the state under Section 69A.
X’s Block Policy & Redressal Mechanism
According to X’s publicly stated policy and past transparency disclosures, the company reviews each legal order and may challenge it in court, but will withhold the targeted account in India pending resolution to avoid potential penalties for non‑compliance.
In May 2025, X acknowledged receiving “executive orders from the Indian government” to block thousands of accounts, highlighting the platform’s limited choice but to comply within statutory timelines or face fines and criminal exposure for its local employees.
Affected users may seek redress for content removals or account suspensions under X’s internal grievance mechanism. They can appeal first to the platform’s Grievance Officer and, if unsatisfied, to a government‑appointed Grievance Appellate Committee within thirty days.
However, such routes do not override formal Section 69A orders. Only a competent court’s stay or quashing of the blocking directive will compel X to restore access “as early as possible,” although the timeline for judicial review remains open‑ended.
