Negative Content Removal in India: IT Act, Intermediary Rules, and What Works

India's intermediary liability framework creates takedown pathways most individuals never use. Section 66A is gone, but other provisions and platform grievance officers remain active.

Intermediary grievance channels

Major platforms operating in India maintain grievance officers under IT Rules. Formal complaints through these channels create documented escalation paths — different from filling out a generic abuse form and hoping.

Response timelines are rule-bound for qualifying intermediaries. A well-framed grievance citing specific IT Act violations and platform policy breaches gets tracked; a vague "remove this" email does not.

Defamation and criminal provisions

Sections 499/500 IPC still apply to online defamation — civil and criminal tracks exist, with very different risk profiles for complainants. Cyberstalking and IT Act provisions cover harassment and certain non-consensual content categories.

We work with Indian counsel on litigation-bound matters. Erasiq's role is platform escalation, evidence documentation, and search de-indexing coordination.

Practical realities

Content hosted outside India still responds to global platform policies. A Facebook post, Google result, or YouTube video isn't immune because the poster sits in Mumbai and the server sits in Oregon.

India cases often need bilingual evidence and local context documentation. Our negative content removal services APAC desk handles intake in IST-friendly hours with counsel referrals when courts are the right forum.

Get started

Negative content removal services

We work with clients in the USA, Canada, India, and worldwide. Tell us what's ranking and we'll give you an honest read on what's fixable.

Discuss your content mitigation options

If you are navigating a reputational matter and unsure which policy pathways apply, our team can assess your case and outline a strategic response — confidentially and without obligation.