Information Technology Act 2000 Section 79: Intermediary Liability and Safe Harbour (2026)

Explainer · Cyber Law · IT Act

Updated for 2026 · Claw Editorial

Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 is the "safe harbour" for intermediaries. It says that a platform, host or network is not liable for third-party content it merely carries or hosts, as long as it stays neutral, does its due diligence, and removes unlawful content when it is required to. The protection is conditional, not absolute. The Supreme Court narrowed it in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), and the 2021 Intermediary Rules tightened the due-diligence conditions. This explainer sets out what the section gives, when protection is lost, and the key case law. Last verified October 2026.

01The short answer

Section 79 protects intermediaries from being blamed for what their users post. A social media platform, hosting service, marketplace or network is generally not liable for third-party content, as long as it did not create the content, stayed neutral, followed due diligence, and removed unlawful content when lawfully required.

This protection is called "safe harbour". It is conditional: if the intermediary helps create the content, or ignores a valid order to take it down, it loses the shield.

02What Section 79 says

Section 79 provides that an intermediary shall not be liable for any third-party information, data or communication link made available or hosted by it. An intermediary is anyone who, on behalf of another person, receives, stores or transmits an electronic record, or provides a service in relation to it, such as a network provider, host, search engine, marketplace or social media platform.

The exemption applies when:

• the intermediary's role is limited to providing access to a communication system, or it does not initiate the transmission, select the receiver, or select or modify the content; and
• the intermediary observes the due diligence required under the Act and the rules.

The due-diligence conditions are now set out in the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

03When safe harbour is lost

Section 79(3) says the exemption does not apply where:

• the intermediary has conspired, abetted, aided or induced the unlawful act; or
• on receiving actual knowledge, or on being notified by the government, that content is being used to commit an unlawful act, it fails to expeditiously remove or disable access to that content.

The second limb, Section 79(3)(b), is the crucial one. The question of what counts as "actual knowledge" decides when a platform must act, and that is exactly what the Supreme Court clarified.

04The Shreya Singhal reading-down

In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), the Supreme Court did not strike down Section 79 but "read it down" to save its constitutionality. The Court held that "actual knowledge" under Section 79(3)(b) means knowledge received through a court order, or a notification by the appropriate government or its agency, that the content falls within the grounds in Article 19(2).

In plain terms, a platform does not lose safe harbour just because a private person complains. It must act on a valid court order or government direction. This stopped platforms from being forced to judge and censor content on every private demand.

05The 2021 Intermediary Rules

The due-diligence conditions that an intermediary must meet to keep safe harbour are set out in the 2021 Intermediary Rules, which replaced the 2011 Rules. In broad terms they require intermediaries to publish rules and privacy policies, remove or disable notified unlawful content within set timelines, and preserve records. Significant social media intermediaries have extra duties, such as appointing a grievance officer, a compliance officer and a nodal contact person, and enabling traceability in some cases.

The Rules have themselves been challenged and continue to be amended. The core point remains: safe harbour under Section 79 is conditional on following these due-diligence duties and acting on valid orders.

06A practical note

If you run any service that carries user content, Section 79 is the shield you rely on, and the 2021 Rules are the conditions you must meet to keep it. Publish your policies, set up a grievance process, act on valid takedown orders within time, and keep records. If you are a victim of unlawful content, the lesson of Shreya Singhal is that a platform is usually required to act on a court or government order, so that is the route to removal.

Remember that safe harbour never protects the author of unlawful content, only the intermediary that carries it.

07Where Claw fits

Claw is an all-in-one legaltech platform for Indian advocates, law firms, and corporate legal teams, combining AI-based case search, an AI legal assistant (Legal GPT), case management, and compliance automation across all Indian courts and tribunals.

Whether an intermediary keeps or loses safe harbour turns on Shreya Singhal and a growing line of High Court rulings on takedown, traceability and the 2021 Rules. Claw lets you search more than 30 crore judgments and orders, with Supreme Court decisions from 1950 and High Court decisions from 1990, in under 5 seconds, so you can read how Section 79 has been applied. You can also track a live challenge or takedown dispute by party or advocate name across 9,102 courts, benches and forums, and get the next hearing date without scanning cause lists by hand. Claw does not use the documents you upload to train its AI models.

Create a free Claw account to track an intermediary liability or takedown matter and follow every hearing, and use case search across Indian courts to find how Section 79 has been read.

08Sources and further reading

• India Code (Information Technology Act, 2000, bare text): indiacode.nic.in
• PRS Legislative Research (IT Act and the 2021 Intermediary Rules): prsindia.org
• Ministry of Electronics and IT (Intermediary Rules and notifications): meity.gov.in
• Claw: clawlaw.in

This explainer is general information, not legal advice. The law changes through amendments and judgments, so check the current text and take advice from counsel before you act.

09Frequently asked questions