New Delhi: The government has forwarded over 1.41 lakh Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) to social media intermediaries for removal of unlawful content since the launch of its Sahyog portal, with platforms acting on them accordingly, said a parliamentary committee report tabled in both Houses Monday. But despite documented instances of delayed compliance, no action has been initiated against any intermediary for non-compliance so far, it added.
The findings are part of the Fourth Report of the Committee on the Empowerment of Women (2025-26) on cybercrimes and cyber-safety of women, presented to both Houses on Monday by its chairperson, BJP MP D. Purandeswari. The report arrives weeks after the government made one of the most significant overhauls of India’s digital regulatory framework since 2021.
MHA delays
The report’s findings come after a process the committee itself found frustrating. At its ninth sitting in July 2025, chairperson Purandeswari formally expressed concern over the delay by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) in furnishing written replies, noting that the ministry had sought a 12-week extension to respond to questions posed at the June sitting. She also highlighted what she described as repeated last-minute exemption requests by the Home Secretary, stressing the need for “seriousness, timeliness, and respect for the Committee’s mandate on women’s welfare”.
The friction is notable given that MHA is the nodal agency for cybercrime in India following an amendment to the Allocation of Business Rules in September 2024. Despite this, the committee found that MHA’s responses to several pointed questions—on fast-track courts, prosecution data, and a unified cybercrime law—were either delayed, deflected to state governments, or curtly dismissed.
On the question of unified cybercrime legislation, MHA’s written reply was unambiguous: “There is no current proposal from I4C, MHA, for a unified cybercrime legislation.” The committee disagreed, recommending in its final report that the government initiate a structured and time-bound examination towards exactly such a law.
Sahyog portal and the timeline question
The Sahyog portal, developed by I4C under MHA, was set up to allow law enforcement agencies to send structured content removal notices to social media intermediaries under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act. It currently has eight Central law enforcement agencies, 28 state agencies, six Union Territory (UT) agencies, 66 Information Technology (IT) intermediaries, and 34 Virtual Asset Service Providers on board. As of July 2025, a total of 16,484 online links, illegal content, apps, and websites have been taken down through the portal—separate from the 1.41 lakh URLs forwarded directly by I4C to intermediaries.
The portal’s legal basis is Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, 2021—the provision requiring platforms to act on court orders or government notices within a specified timeframe. It is precisely this timeline that became a flashpoint during the committee’s proceedings. At its July 2025 sitting, members pressed hard for a tightening of the then-prevailing 36-hour window, arguing that even hours of delay allow morphed images and non-consensual intimate content to go viral and cause irreparable harm to victims.
The February 2026 amendment answered that pressure decisively — compressing the takedown window from 36 hours to just three hours for content deemed illegal by a court order or government direction. A separate two-hour window now applies to the most sensitive categories: non-consensual deepfake nudity and child sexual abuse material.
These tightened timelines apply to complaints received on any information, including synthetically generated information, that comes to the knowledge of the intermediary voluntarily or through the Sahyog portal.
The amendment, notified on February 10 and effective from February 20, also formally introduced the concept of “Synthetically Generated Information”—a first-of-its-kind statutory definition of deepfakes and AI-generated content—and mandated that platforms label such content with permanent provenance metadata. The grievance response time was also reduced from 15 to seven days, with specific cases requiring disposal within 36 hours.
The committee’s report, tabled after these amendments took effect, continues to push further—recommending that MeitY conduct periodic audits of major platforms to assess compliance with the new timelines and impose financial or legal penalties where gaps are found. It also wants all major and emerging intermediaries, including messaging services, cloud platforms, and dating apps, to be mandated onto the Sahyog portal.
Yet a Central enforcement gap persists. Non-compliance with the IT Act’s intermediary provisions entails loss of safe harbour protection—a significant legal consequence. But MHA confirmed to the committee that no action against any IT intermediary has been initiated so far. “In cases of non-compliance or delayed compliance, I4C engages with the intermediary’s nodal officer and convenes meetings,” was the ministry’s response.
What platform data shows
The report also publishes compliance data submitted directly by major platforms. Snapchat reported 67,571 harassment and bullying grievances in February 2025, of which 29,261 were enforced, and 21,466 child sexual exploitation reports with 6,816 enforced. By March, numbers had risen—77,715 harassment reports with 31,966 enforcements. Facebook removed approximately 2 million pieces of adult nudity and sexual content in March 2025 at a proactive detection rate of 97.2 per cent, with child endangerment content seeing a proactive rate of over 98 per cent. Instagram actioned 4,39,400 bullying and harassment items in March at a proactive rate of 94.3 per cent.
X, formerly Twitter, presented a more uneven picture. Between April 2024 and May 2025, it received 280 abuse and harassment grievances from Indian users and actioned 40, and 355 sensitive adult content grievances and actioned 83. Its proactive systems did, however, suspend 2,27,474 accounts for child sexual exploitation in that same period.
(Edited by Nardeep Singh Dahiya)
Also Read: SC scholarship scheme achieved just half its target this year; fellowship cap unchanged since 2005