India has tightened its enforcement stance on online platforms by directing social media companies to remove unlawful content within three hours of receiving official orders, signalling a tougher approach to digital governance and faster compliance expectations for global technology firms operating in the country.
The directive, issued under existing information technology and intermediary rules, significantly shortens the response window for platforms when authorities flag content linked to public order, national security or other violations of law. Until now, companies typically had longer timelines to assess and act on takedown requests. The three-hour deadline reflects the government’s view that harmful content can spread rapidly and cause real-world consequences if not addressed immediately.
Officials argue that the move is aimed at preventing the viral spread of misinformation, inflammatory posts and content that could incite violence or disrupt public order. With India’s vast user base and high social media penetration, authorities have repeatedly expressed concern that delays in content moderation can amplify harm before platforms intervene. The new timeline is intended to ensure swift action once content is formally identified as unlawful.
For social media firms, the order raises the compliance bar. Companies will need to maintain round-the-clock monitoring teams and faster internal escalation processes to meet the deadline. While most large platforms already have systems in place to respond to government requests, the compressed timeframe leaves little room for internal review, especially in complex cases involving legal interpretation or cross-border decision-making.
The directive also reinforces India’s broader regulatory push to assert greater control over digital platforms. Over the past few years, the government has expanded intermediary obligations, increased reporting requirements and emphasised local accountability. The three-hour rule fits into this wider framework, signalling that authorities expect platforms to prioritise government orders over internal moderation timelines.
Critics, however, have raised concerns about the potential impact on free expression and due process. Civil liberties advocates argue that such short deadlines may encourage platforms to err on the side of over-compliance, removing content quickly without sufficient assessment. There are also questions about transparency, including how takedown orders are issued and whether users have adequate avenues to challenge removals.
"From an industry perspective, the order adds to regulatory uncertainty for global technology companies navigating different legal regimes across countries," says Sunil Gangadharan, a social media regulatory expert.
"India is one of the world’s largest digital markets, making compliance essential, but the stricter timelines may increase operational costs and legal risk. Smaller platforms, in particular, could struggle to meet the requirement without significant investment in compliance infrastructure," adds Gangadharan.
While, Rajeev Sundareshan, an online communication and social media service professional said, "...the government, for its part, though maintains that the measure is necessary to keep pace with the speed of online harm and to ensure that lawful orders are not rendered ineffective by delays, the penal provisions can be grossly misused. By mandating near-immediate action, authorities are seeking to shift responsibility more decisively onto platforms for what circulates on their networks," he said.
The three-hour takedown mandate, however, marks another step in India’s evolving approach to regulating social media, prioritising rapid intervention over procedural flexibility. How platforms adapt to the requirement, and how it is enforced in practice, will shape the balance between state control, corporate responsibility and digital rights in the months ahead.