PRATEEK SHARMA vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~84 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 4070/2026 and CM APPL. 19977/2026 Date of Decision: 06.04.2026 IN THE MATTER OF: PRATEEK SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Vrinda Grover, with Mr. Apar Gupta, Mr. Nakul Gandhi, Ms. Siddhi Sahoo, Mr. Gurdeep Singh, Mr. Soutik Banerjee Ms. Devika Tulsiani and Ms. Indumugi C., Advocates. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr. Amit Tiwari (CGSC), Ms. Avshreya Pratap Singh Rudy, (CGSC) with Ms. Usha Jamnal, ⁠Ms. Nyasa Sharma,. ⁠Mr. Ankit Khatri, Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. RV Prabhat, Mr. Shubham Sharma, Mr. Yash Wardhan Sharma, Mr. Naman, Advocates for UOI. Mr. Ankit Parhar, Mr. Tejpal Singh Rathore, Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Ms. Tanish Gupta, Ms. Sanchli Sethi, Advocates for R-2/ X. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV JUDGEMENT PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner, primarily, to seek the production of a blocking order passed by respondent no. 1-Ministry of Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified Signed By:AMIT KUMAR Signed SHARMA Signing Date:07.04.2026 By:PURUSHAINDRA 20:06:30 W.P.(C) 4070/2026 Page 1 of 4 KUMAR KAURAV Electronics and Information Technology (hereinafter “MeitY”); and the restoration of his account on the respondent no. 2 platform-X Corp. (hereinafter “X”). 2. The petitioner contends that it operates an X account with the username “@DrNimoYadav”, and has approximately 13,56,000 followers. On 19.03.2026, it is contended that the petitioner received a communication from X, informing him that a blocking order has been issued by MeitY under Section 69A of the the Information Technology Act, 2000 (hereinafter “IT Act”), and the account of the petitioner has been withheld/blocked in India.