Siddharth Agarwal

Walking across India / Story Collector / Print maker 📸 / Nurturing @veditum + @moving_upstream + @indiasandwatch / Co-steering @indiariverforum / @iitkgp alum

[Tongam Rina @tongamrina]

“Tum kiya baar baar bolte rehtai darwaja khula hei, meeting karne aajao.
Dekho mukh as bahut kuch nikalnewala hey. Teen words tera kaan mey nei gusta heikia? No Siang dam. Kitna baar bolega. Kisko meeting karega?” Katon has dedicated time to researching the Siang River. As an environmental engineer and a native of the valley, he speaks with professional authority as well as delivers what many people think but aren’t able to verbalise for various reasons. The state will likely target him, just as it has targeted many others opposed to Siang upper multipurpose project . Ebo Mili, Otul Jerang, Tajong Talom, Adum Tayom, Omak Paron, Okut Paloh, and Oson Paron are still in jail for the rights of the indigenous people. The people of Siang live in deep anxiety, yet they stand prepared for any eventuality as the state oppression continues. Let us not forget the Indian state has deployed roughly 3,000 armed police against its own citizens in a valley within a state that guards India's international borders, all in the name of national security. #IndigenousRights

[Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) @internetfreedom]

Delhi Police asks X to take down IFF's account and posts. IFF will challenge the notices in court unless they are withdrawn.

The Delhi Police has asked X to remove the Internet Freedom Foundation's account, six of its posts, the accounts of SFLC and @geoblockedindia, and posts by 16 other users, on the ground that they defame the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. The posts document and comment on a legal notice sent in the RSS's name to IFF, SFLC and @geoblockedindia, which demanded that the three stop criticising and documenting government blocking orders. IFF received copies of the two police notices from X on the morning of 3 November 2026.
IFF calls on the Delhi Police to withdraw both notices. If they are not withdrawn, IFF will challenge them in court.

What has happened

On 29 October 2026 at 9:54 PM, IFF, SFLC and the operator of @geoblockedindia received a two-page "legal notice" said to be issued on behalf of the RSS. It asked the three to stop opposing the government's blocking directions, stop documenting restricted content, stop posting details of geo-blocked posts, and confirm in writing within seven days that they would comply. It was signed by an unnamed "Authorised Signatory". Several RSS office-bearers have since said on X that the notice is not authentic. IFF replied to the notice, wrote to the RSS at its official address asking whether it had authorised it, and published both the notice and its reply on 30 October.

On 31 October 2026 at 8:06 PM, the Special Commissioner of Police (Crime), Delhi Police, filed an "Illegal Content Report" with X (reference LD-321926). It listed two posts: IFF's post of 30 October on the notice, and SFLC post of the same day. The stated reason was that the posts are "defamatory towards the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023". The boxes for "safety/security", "defamation" and "other" were ticked. The fields for the nature of the court order and court order details were left empty. The desired action was "Remove/withhold content".

On 1 November 2026, a second notice arrived in the RSS's name. It said the matter had been handed to the Akhil Bharatiya Adhivakta Parishad, that complaints had been filed in several states, and that requests had been made to block IFF's X account and suspend the organisations. The Delhi Police had made its first request to X the previous evening. IFF did not know this until X told it on 3 November.

On 2 November 2026 at 8:51 AM, the Special Commissioner of Police (Crime) filed a second notice with X (reference LD-322956). It lists 40 URLs. Thirty-seven are posts. Three are the entire accounts of @internetfreedom, @SFLCin and @geoblockedindia. This time the boxes for "Hate speech", "defamation", "safety/security", "enforcement of court order" and "other" were all ticked. The court order fields were again left empty. The stated reason reads: "The posts constitute defamation and illegal content under Section 356 BNS. Under Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, 2021, read with Section 79(3)(b) IT Act, lawful notices require action within 3 hours."

The 16 other users are @ProdctiveUseful, @PanjwaniManoj, @jidge_, @RatanSharda55, @baxiabhishek, @SchrdingersDbag, @ashleshbiradar, @seemay, @NasirHussainINC, @Being_creat_ive, @AjoyDharmavaram, @othlaw, @_ananyaaa, @AimPoojaind, @incorigibleBhai and @rraoind. Their posts, as far as IFF can tell, comment on the notice or on the notice about it.

X forwarded both notice to IFF on 3 November 2026, at 8:47 AM and 10:03 AM, saying it was doing so "in the interest of transparency" and that IFF may wish to seek legal counsel and challenge the request in court. X's emails do not say that it has acted on the requests. The Delhi Police has not written to IFF, and no court has been approached, as far as the reports disclose. SFLC and @geoblockedindia have separately reported notifications from X about requests from the Uttar Pradesh Police, the Telangana Police and the Delhi Police's Cyber Crime unit, one of them against the whole of the @geoblockedindia account.

IFF's position

IFF condemns this legal action. A police force has made itself the enforcement arm of a private legal notice whose authenticity the organisation it names has not confirmed, and whose demand was that three organisations stop documenting censorship. The notices would deliver exactly what the notice asked for as they would also remove the accounts of the three groups in India that keep public records of what is blocked, and of who ordered it.

The posts in question are about a legal notice sent to us. They quote it, criticise how it was drafted, and say that we will carry on with our work. A person who receives a threat is entitled to publish it and answer it and that is not defamation of the sender.

In the three weeks before the first notice, IFF assisted 86 people whose accounts were suspended or whose posts were withheld in India. SFLC's Free Speech Tracker recorded about 268 content restrictions and 83 account restrictions in the first 29 days of October. @geoblockedindia publishes the orders behind such blocks when platforms disclose them. None of this is unlawful. Documenting censorship and challenging it in court is what the Constitution expects of citizens.
IFF will not delete the posts. If the Delhi Police does not withdraw the notices, we will challenge them in court.

Why the reports are unlawful

Defamation is not a police matter. Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is a non-cognizable and bailable offence. Under Section 222 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, no court can take cognizance of it except on a complaint by the person aggrieved.

Under Section 174 of the BNSS, the police cannot investigate a non-cognizable offence without an order of a Magistrate. The Special Commissioner of Police (Crime) is not the person aggrieved. The notices disclose no complaint by the RSS and no order of any Magistrate. Whether a statement is defamatory is for a court to decide after hearing its author, with the defences of truth, fair comment and good faith available to that author.

In Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, (2016) 7 SCC 221, the Supreme Court upheld criminal defamation on the strength of these safeguards. A police officer who asks a platform to remove speech as defamatory has decided the question himself, without a complainant, a court or a hearing.

The posts are protected comment. Exceptions 1 to 3 to Section 356(1) protect the truth published for the public good, opinion on the public conduct of public servants, and opinion on the conduct of any person touching a public question. The posts publish a notice that was sent to us and give our opinion of it. The RSS, if it sent the notice, chose to enter a public question. If it did not, the posts defame no one.

Further, Section 79(3)(b) and Rule 3(1)(d) do not permit this. In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) 5 SCC 1, the Supreme Court read down Section 79(3)(b) so that an intermediary acquires "actual knowledge" only through a court order, or a notification from the appropriate government or its agency that unlawful acts relatable to Article 19(2) are being committed. The court said that it would be difficult for intermediaries to judge the legitimacy of the millions of requests they receive, and that the burden must not be placed on them. Rule 3(1)(d), as amended in November 2025 and February 2026, now requires the intimation to come from an officer not below the rank of Joint Secretary or Deputy Inspector General, to be reasoned, and to specify the legal basis and the nature of the unlawful act, subject to a monthly review by a Secretary-level officer. The three-hour window the notice invokes applies to a lawful order that meets these conditions. A web form that ticks "hate speech" and "enforcement of court order" while leaving the court order fields blank, and that gives one sentence of reasons for 40 URLs, is not such an order.

The notices by the Delhi Police are disproportionate. They seek to remove three accounts in their entirety, with years of posts, over six, four and eleven posts respectively. They sweep in 16 third parties whose only connection is that they commented on a public controversy. In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, (2020) 3 SCC 637, the Supreme Court held that any restriction on speech must be necessary, proportionate and the least restrictive measure available, and that orders restricting speech must be published and reasoned. Removing an organisation's entire account for criticising a legal notice fails each of these tests.

The effect is to silence documentation of censorship and providing legal aid to Indian internet users. The accounts named are those that record blocking orders in India. The notice asked them to stop. A takedown request that accomplishes the demand of an anonymous private notice is not law enforcement. It is the use of state power for a private end, which Article 14 forbids.

Our demands

1. To the Delhi Police: Withdraw reports LD-321926 and LD-322956 and confirm the withdrawal in writing to X and to IFF.

2. To the Delhi Police: Disclose the complaint on which the Special Commissioner of Police (Crime) acted, the authority under which the reports were filed, and whether any order of a Magistrate under Section 174 BNSS exists. Disclose every request made to any platform in this matter, including those made by the Cyber Crime unit against @geoblockedindia.

3. To X: Do not act on the reports. If any content is withheld in India, tell the affected user before acting, give them the full request, and name the legal basis. Publish both reports to the Lumen database, as the reporting form itself contemplates.

4. To the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology and the Ministry of Home Affairs: Have the Secretary-level review required by Rule 3(1)(d) examine these intimations, and tell police forces that Rule 3(1)(d) is not a remedy for defamation, which the law reserves to the person aggrieved and to the courts.

5. To the RSS: State publicly whether it authorised either notice or any complaint to the police. If it did not, say so to the Delhi Police.

If the notices are not withdrawn, IFF will challenge them in court. We will continue to document blocking orders, to publish them, and to provide legal assistance to anyone whose account or post is withheld in India. Nothing in these notices changes that.

[Tongam Rina @tongamrina]

Two pages of absolute nonsense and claims not backed up by research. You inflict violence on the people, tear-gas them, provoke them to anger, and spread fear. Yet, in the same breath, you claim that dam construction is not being discussed at this stage. Why did you militarise?
If the Centre and the state are genuinely willing to dialogue with the people of Siang who clearly do not want this hydropower project, first withdraw the 3,000 Central Armed Police personnel, halt the PFR, and release all detainees. How utterly disconnected from reality are you, compassionately cruel CM?
#IndigenousRights #SaveSiang

[Tongam Rina @tongamrina]

What happened in Pasighat would not have happened had DGP Jamwal, SP Lamba, and the government handled it well. At this point, I have nothing to say about the police action against me and Sunny Tayeng, and their illegal surveillance. I just wish they had asked lawyer Sunny Tayeng, who is appearing for anti-dam activists Ebo Mili, Tajong Talom, Otul Jerang, and many others, and me at least once instead of asking for a search warrant from the court. Sunny is a busy lawyer and brilliant at her work, so she needs to focus on her practice rather than being burdened by extra work. We will see what happens tomorrow so will you all. Please be reassured that I have seen enough intimidation in my life, so this isn’t something that will stop me from writing or my activism. More power to the people of Siang valley and Arunachal. We owe it to Siang and her people. I will continue to stand with the people of Siang Valley, with Ebo Mili, Otul Jerang, and Tajong Talom, who are in judicial custody in Pasighat, and Adum Tayum, Okut Palloh, Oson Paron, and Omak Paron, who are in jail under APUAPA. Please don’t get distracted by the East Siang district police action against Sunny and me. They would not have done it without someone’s direction. Please continue talking about Siang and her people. Once again, thank you very much for the solidarity.

[Akshay Deshmane @DeshmaneAkshay]

<New Work>

In this report for @NewDelhiPost, I reveal the legal risks faced by a Rs. 23,000 crore bauxite mining project pursued by the Adani Group & explain its links with Adivasi rights,wildlife & forest protection.

Click here👇to read the full report https://t.co/b4B6ULeHfE

[Tongam Rina @tongamrina]

Isn’t the Siang so beautiful? She brings me solace and calms my anxious mind. She is the witness. #SaveSiang

[Nitin Sethi @nit_set]

🚨 Arunachal Pradesh police applies for search warrants against one of state's most respected journalists, Tongam Rina, associate editor @arunachaltimes_ and lawyer Sunny Tayeng who represents environmental activists Ebo Milli, Otul Jerang and Tajong Talom.

#SiangUpperMultipurposeProject #Siang

[Shripad Dharmadhikary @ShripadManthan]

Today, at 4 PM (IST) 4.15 PM (Nepal ST)
Webinar: Beyond the Breach: Understanding Cascading Mountain Hazards in Nepal and Building Climate Resilience
Register at the link below for joining the webinar
https://t.co/XMJUCpS72W

[Srinivas Kodali @digitaldutta]

They found 1600 foreigners and killed 13 cr Indians in the process. #SIR

[Gautam Bhatia @gautambhatia88]

Schrödinger’s Supreme Court.

[Dushyant Arora @atti_cus]

So Indian citizens deprived of transparency and accountability in the name of preventing publicity lawyers. Because of course there was no other way to deter them.

[Mumbai | | Paused @SloganMurugan]

Art installation by the Mumbai School of Monumental art and Applied Absurdities called The Geometry of Abstract Objects Blocking Pedestrian Movement. Govandi Station. #IndianRailRomeo

[Siddharth Agarwal @sidagarwal]

This Friday in Kolkata. Join us for a discussion with Rahul from @goafoundation on what does it really mean to think of a world shared with future generations?

Sign up here: https://t.co/WYshiKIreJ

Hosted by Kolkata Change Makers at @veditum's office. Pls join us & share / RT.

[Zoru Bhathena @zoru75]

Hello @MumbaiPolice @Santacruz_PS

Juhu Beach is a Public Beach
With No timing restrictions

Role of Juhu Beach Police is to patrol the beach
To keep visitors safe

Not to remove the visitors

[Srinivas Kodali @digitaldutta]

The blunders Tata Consulting Services usage of AI is doing with our electoral rolls part of SIR

[Gaurav Tomar @talkwithgt]

Election Commission’s software has made a massive blunder. It’s translating Hindi/Urdu names by treating them as if they were English.

For example, the name was Muhammad Iqbal Beg, but the software turned it into “Mohammad Iqbal Bheek Mangte Hain”.

Another example: A woman’s name was Phool Kali Devi, and the software changed it to “Murkh Kali Devi” .

Absolute chaos, what’s going on?

[Siddharth Agarwal @sidagarwal]

A blue green bea eater, and river grasses along an undulating river bank of River Ken in Bundelkhand.

My 1st contribution to the #SandBanksOfIndia campaign by @indiasandwatch, @indiawater & @SloganMurugan!

Do share you pictures of healthy #SandBanksOfIndia! @veditum

[India Sand Watch @indiasandwatch]

A collaboration between us ISW / @veditum, @indiawater, and @SloganMurugan to find photos of healthy river banks from India!

Post a photo of a healthy riverbank from India, use #SandBanksOfIndia and tag us. Tell us which river it is and where the photograph was taken.

1/3

[Siddharth Agarwal @sidagarwal]

Some facts and questions:

Fact: This is actually a diversion of the Ganga, and not the actual river.

Question: we often hear of aquatic life being found in the canals in these parts. Was that somehow considered in this decision?

[🇮🇳Rohit🇮🇳 @Rohit_p__]

They stopped the flow of the Ganga near Har ki paudi at Haridwar for next 18 days just so they can clean it before Diwali. And the moment the water level dropped the truth came out...the entire riverbed is buried under clothes, plastic bags, discarded slippers, and pure filth.

The natural stones that should be there..but completely hidden under our garbage.

Year after year the same story bhakts leave behind their waste the administration stops the water once a year, locals cleans up the mess we created and then we start dumping again the moment the water returns. 😒

You cant revere a river as divine and simultaneously turn her into a landfill.

If this is how we treat the river we claim to worship then maybe we dontt deserve to call her MAA at all.

Period !!

[Siddharth Agarwal @sidagarwal]

Join us this Saturday as we reflect on year 3 of @indiasandwatch in the public domain, and how citizens and communities have created protection for India's rivers from illegal mining.

Register here: https://t.co/w6kyraM2uw

@veditum @aishani07 @Indian_Rivers @indiawater

[Nivedita Khandekar @nivedita_Him]

#SandMining

One activity that is causing slow death for our rivers !!!

This is somewhere in the lower #Himalayas ... zoom to see the machines gnawing at the river bed.