Spanish Version

In September 2011, India crossed the landmark of 100 million in terms of number of claimed internet users. But by the end of the year 2011, a total number of claimed internet users crossed more than 121 million due to the continuing internet momentum. Among the claimed internet users, the statistical analysis depicts the UNIQUE USERS in India i.e. those who are heavy users of Social Networking Sites, which is presented in graphical form:

It is evident from the above stated data; Social Networking Sites (SNWs) like Facebook, Orkut, YouTube, Twitter and Google+, which enable hundreds of millions of individual users to publish and share on the worldwide web, are made up of millions of lives.

But the social networking giants did not respond to the repeated requests of the government to block or remove the inflammatory contents which might “offend Indian sensibilities.” This for the reason that the executives of these social networking giants said “due to the huge volume of user-generated content coming from India, the demand is impossible to be met, and they cannot be responsible for determining what is or isn't defamatory or disparaging.”  

Due to the demand of screening user content and removal of offensive material before it is uploaded, the tension developed between the government and internet and social media companies.

In this connection, the government called for an open dialogue with the social media firms, where the Information Technology Minister met the representatives of all leading Internet companies, which included Google, Facebook and Twitter besides other stakeholders. During which the concerned minister specified that there was no question of censoring Internet content, but it was a request to the representatives of those firms to give their opinions on how social media and e-governance can empower individuals and citizens of this country.

It should be noted that in the year 2011, the government notified the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011, under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which sought to address the question as the said rules provided a mandate for internet intermediaries to censor the contents that is harmful, harassing, blasphemous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, pedophilic, libelous, invasive of another's  privacy, hateful, or racially,  ethnically objectionable, disparaging, relating or  encouraging money  laundering or  gambling,  or  otherwise unlawful in any manner whatever.

As far as other Asian countries are concerned, in 2009, China's central government blocked the nation's access to almost all online networking sites such as Twitter, most Google applications, and Facebook. Whatever is the ideological stance on why the government blocks certain websites, the direct reason that Facebook was blocked because of the deadly riots in its western region of Xinjiang. It has been noted that more than 2600 website urls are blocked in the People's Republic of China under the country's policy of Internet censorship, and now foreign residents and visitors complain about "The Great Firewall of China" after experiencing the slowness of the internet and the complete blocking of certain websites like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter in China.

In the second week of February 2012, the said matter moved to the Delhi High Court, where in the Court directed the Department of Information Technology to submit the papers on sanction for prosecution of Google India and social networking site like Facebook for allegedly hosting objectionable contents. In the Court proceedings when Google India counsel said the Union government had no locus to interfere in the matter as it was a complaint case. Countering the argument, counsel for the Delhi Police said the investigating agency submitted a report to the lower court which had asked for it. The Department of Information Technology had also given sanction for prosecution of the sites, including Google India, saying it was a fit case for initiating proceedings. Thereupon, the Court asked the Department to submit papers relating to the sanction for prosecution on February 15, 2012.

On February 16, 2012, the Delhi High Court declined the plea filed by Facebook and Google to stay criminal proceedings in a case of 'objectionable' content being posted online, like Yahoo India. After the heated argument before the High Court by Google India’s lawyer, the Court declined plea of the counsel for the State of Delhi and Delhi Police, who was insisting that Managing Director of Google India and Director Online operations of Facebook India appear in person and seek exemption from the lower court, and directed that lawyers of Facebook and Google can appear on behalf of their authorized representatives in the lower court, against whom summons have been issued.

Thereafter, the High Court issued the summons to Google and Facebook thereby informing that they will have to appear in a lower court on March 13, 2012, along with Yahoo and Microsoft, who have been made a party in this case, which has now been adjourned till May 23, 2012.

In third week of March 2012, the Delhi High Court cancelled the criminal proceedings against Microsoft India, for lack of any evidence and leaving behind, Microsoft India as the only company, out of the 21 websites, against whom both criminal and civil proceedings pending in the capital's High Court and trial court now stand quashed.