The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a plea filed by two individuals seeking restoration of their blocked WhatsApp account and wider guidelines on how social media companies suspend user access.
The matter, argued by senior advocate Mahalaxmi Pawni before a bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta, was withdrawn after the Court pointed out that such grievances were not fit for a constitutional writ under Article 32.
As the hearing began, Justice Mehta asked a pointed question:
"What is your fundamental right to have access to WhatsApp?" Pawni replied that her client, a doctor by profession, had used the platform for over a decade to communicate with patients and colleagues.
The sudden block, she said, had brought professional communication to a halt.
But the bench didn’t appear convinced.
"There are other options available. Use our own apps-Make in India!" Justice Mehta remarked with a faint smile, referring to the Indian messaging app Arattai.
When the counsel argued that WhatsApp had acted without transparency and due process, the bench turned to the constitutional question - whether such private platforms could be treated as State under Article 12. Pawni conceded they could not, effectively undermining the jurisdiction of a writ petition.
Justice Nath then gently suggested that the petitioners approach a civil court or other appropriate forum instead. After a brief consultation, Pawni sought to withdraw the petition. The bench allowed it, granting liberty to seek remedies elsewhere.
"The petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for," Justice Nath said, closing the matter with a short but firm order.
Case Title: Dr. Raman Kundra & Anr. vs. WhatsApp LLC / Meta Platforms & Ors.
Case Number: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 932 of 2025
Date of Order: October 10, 2025
Petitioners Counsel: Senior Advocate Mahalaxmi Pawni, with Advocates Randhir Kumar Ojha (AOR), Mukesh Kumar Singh, Jalaj Panwar, and V.K. Pandey
Respondents: WhatsApp LLC / Meta Platforms & Ors.
