Detailed report on Web Content Censorship: Supreme Court’s strong remarks on accountability, anti-national posts, age verification, and the need for an autonomous regulatory authority.
By Qalam Times News Network
New Delhi | 27 November 2025
The Supreme Court presses the Centre for firm rules on user-generated content, raising concerns over online abuse, anti-national posts, and children’s safety.
Web Content Censorship took center stage in the Supreme Court on Thursday, when the bench firmly declared that in the unregulated world of user-generated content, “someone must be held accountable.” The court directed the Union government to frame clear rules within four weeks to regulate online platforms and ensure responsibility for the content they host.
During the hearing of the “India’s Got Latent” case—where YouTube creators like Ranveer Allahbadia and comedian Samay Raina were caught in controversy—the court said the matter goes far beyond a single incident.
Reiterating the need for Web Content Censorship, the bench noted that unchecked online content has grown into a broader concern involving public morality, the spread of perversion, national security, and the protection of minors.
“Freedom of Expression Cannot Slide Into Perversion”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the problem was not merely vulgarity but “perversion,” which he described as a major flaw in the ecosystem of user-generated content. Chief Justice Surya Kant responded with concern: “The problem is that everyone has their own channel, and no one is accountable. Someone has to be answerable.”
Anti-National Content and the Problem of Response Time
Justice Joymalya Bagchi, part of the bench, raised a key point regarding anti-national content. He observed that objectionable material spreads rapidly:“By the time authorities react, the content has already gone viral to millions. How do we control this?” He questioned whether creators of such content should bear legal responsibility for the consequences.
Aadhaar-Based Age Verification and Stronger Warnings Suggested
The court emphasized that while children also have the right to freedom of expression, their safety cannot be compromised. Justice Bagchi said sensitive or adult content should carry strong warnings and must be age-restricted—verified through Aadhaar or another acceptable system.
Chief Justice Surya Kant added:“A disclaimer flashes, and the show immediately begins—that is not enough. The warning must stay longer, and only after age verification should the programme start.” He clarified that these were only conceptual examples, not definitive solutions.
Push for an Autonomous Regulatory Authority
The bench recommended the creation of an Autonomous Regulatory Authority, involving experts from fields such as media, technology, and the judiciary.
The judges said: “Let it come on a pilot basis. If it interferes with freedom of speech, it can be revisited. But we need a responsible society first.”
Samay Raina Case: “We Want Dignity, Not Money”
The hearing also discussed comedian Samay Raina’s remarks about individuals suffering from Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA).
Senior advocate Aparajita Singh, representing an SMA support group, informed the court that Raina had deposited ₹2.5 lakh as compensation. She said:
“We don’t want the money—we are here for dignity.”
The Chief Justice asked the Solicitor General to consider a strict law—similar to the SC/ST Act—to punish insults against persons with disabilities. “Humor cannot come at the cost of dignity,” Mehta agreed. The bench advised Raina to use his platform positively: “They don’t need your money. They need respect. Host a show highlighting their achievements.”
