Skip to main content
Loading page, please wait…
HomeCurrent AffairsEditorialsGovt SchemesLearning ResourcesUPSC SyllabusPricingAboutBest UPSC AIUPSC AI ToolAI for UPSCUPSC ChatGPT

© 2026 Vaidra. All rights reserved.

PrivacyTerms
Vaidra Logo
Vaidra

Top 4 items + smart groups

UPSC GPT
New
Current Affairs
Daily Solutions
Daily Puzzle
Mains Evaluator

Version 2.0.0 • Built with ❤️ for UPSC aspirants

Delhi High Court Orders Action on Rana Ayyub’s X Posts Allegedly Insulting Hindu Deities | GS2 UPSC Current Affairs April 2026
Delhi High Court Orders Action on Rana Ayyub’s X Posts Allegedly Insulting Hindu Deities
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday called for action on posts made by journalist Rana Ayyub on 'X' (formerly Twitter) platform allegedly insulting Hindu deities and spreading anti-India sentiment. The Court said that the matter requires urgent consideration and asked the Delhi Police to transmit the documents to X Corp. 4 (Ayyub) pursuant to which even an FIR is directed to be registered against (Ayyub) on the directions of the court of competent jurisdiction,” the Court said.
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday called for action on posts made by journalist Rana Ayyub on 'X' (formerly Twitter) platform allegedly insulting Hindu deities and spreading anti-India sentiment. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav was hearing a plea filed by Amita Sachdeva seeking deletion of the tweets alleging that they are derogatory, inflammatory and communally sensitive. While issuing notice on the plea, the Court asked the Union of India, X Corp, Delhi Police and Ayyub to file responses by tomorrow. The Court said that the matter requires urgent consideration and asked the Delhi Police to transmit the documents to X Corp. “Action is necessary in view of the highly derogatory, inflammatory and communal tweets by respondent no. 4 (Ayyub) pursuant to which even an FIR is directed to be registered against (Ayyub) on the directions of the court of competent jurisdiction,” the Court said. The matter is now listed on Friday.Sachdeva has alleged that Ayyub, through her tweets, has not only insulted Hindu deities but also defamed Veer Savarkar and Indian Army. The tweets, total 6 in question, date back to 2013 to 2017. For context, Sachdeva, who claims to be a devout follower of Sanatan Dharma, had filed a complaint on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal requesting criminal action against Ayyub for the social media posts.Later, an FIR was ordered against Ayyub after the trial court observed that "prima-facie" cognizable offences were made out against her punishable under Section 153A (promoting enmity between different groups), 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class) and 505 (statements conducing public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.In his fresh petition before the High Court, Sachdeva has now sought deletion of the X posts saying that the same have prima facie disclosed the offences in question.As per the petition, Sachdeva had approached X Corp's Grievance Appellate Committee which declined to grant relief on the ground that the matter was sub judice.”Despite the complete exhaustion of the remedies available under Rules 3(2) and 3A of the IT Rules, 2021, of the IT Intermediary Guidelines, the offending tweets continue to remain publicly accessible worldwide as on date. The continued availability of the impugned content is causing ongoing injury to religious sentiments, disturbing communal harmony, and rendering the judicial directions ineffective,” the plea said.In May last year, the Delhi Police had told the trial court that details of Ayyub's X account and the alleged tweets in question were awaited and that the posts are not available on the social media platform.Sachdeva alleged that Ayyub has consistently used her social media to insult Hindu Deities, malign the fabric of Indian unity and promote hostility toward India and its citizens including Indian Army. It was Sachdeva's case that despite follow ups, no action was taken on her complaint. Accordingly, she filed an application under Section 156(3) of CrPC seeking registration of FIR against the journalist.Title: AMITA SACHDEVA v. UOI & Ors
  1. Home
  2. Prepare
  3. Current Affairs
  4. Delhi High Court Orders Action on Rana Ayyub’s X Posts Allegedly Insulting Hindu Deities
Login to bookmark articles
Login to mark articles as complete

Overview

gs.gs262% UPSC Relevance

Delhi HC’s order on Rana Ayyub’s X posts highlights judiciary’s check on online hate speech

Key Facts

  1. 8 April 2026: Delhi High Court directed Union of India, X Corp, Delhi Police and journalist Rana Ayyub to respond.
  2. Six X posts, dated between 2013‑2017, alleged to insult Hindu deities, defame Veer Savarkar and the Indian Army.
  3. Petitioner Amita Sachdeva (self‑declared Sanatan Dharma follower) invoked IPC Sections 153A, 295A, 505 and CrPC Section 156(3).
  4. The case also cites IT Rules 2021 (Rules 3(2) & 3A) – notice‑and‑take liability of intermediaries.
  5. X Corp’s Grievance Appellate Committee rejected the deletion request, stating the matter is sub judice.
  6. An FIR was registered after a complaint on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal was found prima‑facie credible.
  7. Notice issued to Union of India, X Corp, Delhi Police and Rana Ayyub; replies were sought within a day.

Background & Context

The order sits at the intersection of criminal law (IPC hate‑speech provisions), digital intermediary liability under the IT Act, and constitutional freedom of speech. It illustrates how the judiciary can intervene to curb online content that threatens communal harmony, a recurring theme in GS‑2 and GS‑4.

UPSC Syllabus Connections

Essay•Media, Communication and InformationGS4•Information sharing, transparency, RTI, codes of ethics and conduct

Mains Answer Angle

GS‑2: Discuss the challenges of regulating hate speech on social media while protecting Article 19(1)(a) freedoms. GS‑4: Evaluate the role of intermediary guidelines (IT Rules 2021) in balancing free expression with public order.

Full Article

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday called for action on posts made by journalist Rana Ayyub on 'X' (formerly Twitter) platform allegedly insulting Hindu deities and spreading anti-India sentiment. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav was hearing a plea filed by Amita Sachdeva seeking deletion of the tweets alleging that they are derogatory, inflammatory and communally sensitive. While issuing notice on the plea, the Court asked the Union of India, X Corp, Delhi Police and Ayyub to file responses by tomorrow. The Court said that the matter requires urgent consideration and asked the Delhi Police to transmit the documents to X Corp. “Action is necessary in view of the highly derogatory, inflammatory and communal tweets by respondent no. 4 (Ayyub) pursuant to which even an FIR is directed to be registered against (Ayyub) on the directions of the court of competent jurisdiction,” the Court said. The matter is now listed on Friday.Sachdeva has alleged that Ayyub, through her tweets, has not only insulted Hindu deities but also defamed Veer Savarkar and Indian Army. The tweets, total 6 in question, date back to 2013 to 2017. For context, Sachdeva, who claims to be a devout follower of Sanatan Dharma, had filed a complaint on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal requesting criminal action against Ayyub for the social media posts.Later, an FIR was ordered against Ayyub after the trial court observed that "prima-facie" cognizable offences were made out against her punishable under Section 153A (promoting enmity between different groups), 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class) and 505 (statements conducing public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.In his fresh petition before the High Court, Sachdeva has now sought deletion of the X posts saying that the same have prima facie disclosed the offences in question.As per the petition, Sachdeva had approached X Corp's Grievance Appellate Committee which declined to grant relief on the ground that the matter was sub judice.”Despite the complete exhaustion of the remedies available under Rules 3(2) and 3A of the IT Rules, 2021, of the IT Intermediary Guidelines, the offending tweets continue to remain publicly accessible worldwide as on date. The continued availability of the impugned content is causing ongoing injury to religious sentiments, disturbing communal harmony, and rendering the judicial directions ineffective,” the plea said.In May last year, the Delhi Police had told the trial court that details of Ayyub's X account and the alleged tweets in question were awaited and that the posts are not available on the social media platform.Sachdeva alleged that Ayyub has consistently used her social media to insult Hindu Deities, malign the fabric of Indian unity and promote hostility toward India and its citizens including Indian Army. It was Sachdeva's case that despite follow ups, no action was taken on her complaint. Accordingly, she filed an application under Section 156(3) of CrPC seeking registration of FIR against the journalist.Title: AMITA SACHDEVA v. UOI & Ors
Read Original on livelaw

Analysis

Practice Questions

GS1
Easy
Prelims MCQ

Hate speech and communal offences

1 marks
4 keywords
GS2
Medium
Mains Short Answer

Intermediary liability & digital governance

10 marks
6 keywords
GS2
Hard
Mains Essay

Freedom of expression vs. public order in the digital age

250 marks
8 keywords
Related:Daily•Weekly

Loading related articles...

Loading related articles...

Tip: Click articles above to read more from the same date, or use the back button to see all articles.

Quick Reference

Key Insight

Delhi HC’s order on Rana Ayyub’s X posts highlights judiciary’s check on online hate speech

Key Facts

  1. 8 April 2026: Delhi High Court directed Union of India, X Corp, Delhi Police and journalist Rana Ayyub to respond.
  2. Six X posts, dated between 2013‑2017, alleged to insult Hindu deities, defame Veer Savarkar and the Indian Army.
  3. Petitioner Amita Sachdeva (self‑declared Sanatan Dharma follower) invoked IPC Sections 153A, 295A, 505 and CrPC Section 156(3).
  4. The case also cites IT Rules 2021 (Rules 3(2) & 3A) – notice‑and‑take liability of intermediaries.
  5. X Corp’s Grievance Appellate Committee rejected the deletion request, stating the matter is sub judice.
  6. An FIR was registered after a complaint on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal was found prima‑facie credible.
  7. Notice issued to Union of India, X Corp, Delhi Police and Rana Ayyub; replies were sought within a day.

Background

The order sits at the intersection of criminal law (IPC hate‑speech provisions), digital intermediary liability under the IT Act, and constitutional freedom of speech. It illustrates how the judiciary can intervene to curb online content that threatens communal harmony, a recurring theme in GS‑2 and GS‑4.

UPSC Syllabus

  • Essay — Media, Communication and Information
  • GS4 — Information sharing, transparency, RTI, codes of ethics and conduct

Mains Angle

GS‑2: Discuss the challenges of regulating hate speech on social media while protecting Article 19(1)(a) freedoms. GS‑4: Evaluate the role of intermediary guidelines (IT Rules 2021) in balancing free expression with public order.

Explore:Current Affairs·Editorial Analysis·Govt Schemes·Study Materials·Previous Year Questions·UPSC GPT