NEW DELHI, Oct. 28 -- Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke on Wednesday accused the Centre of orchestrating a crackdown on critical content on Instagram, alleging that thousands of posts and accounts were being restricted daily, even as several content creators and media organisations complained about the removal of their posts.
In a post on X, Dipke said attempts to restrict criticism on social media would not address the issues being raised by citizens and could deepen public distrust in the government. "The Instagram crackdown is not going to work! The government is taking down thousands of posts and accounts every day, but it seems to be missing a fundamental point," Dipke said. He maintained that Instagram was merely a platform through which citizens expressed their concerns, while the underlying reasons for those concerns existed beyond social media. "The reasons behind those questions exist far beyond social media, and taking down accounts won't make them disappear," he said, warning that censorship could create further distrust among citizens. The allegations came amid complaints from satirists, activists and independent media organisations that Instagram had restricted posts containing criticism of the government or reporting on public affairs.
CJP leader Ashutosh Ranka also alleged widespread restrictions on Instagram accounts and videos in India. In a post on X on October 26, Ranka claimed that thousands of accounts had been restricted and lakhs of videos removed from the platform. He also criticised Meta, Instagram's parent company, over the reported action. However, the figures cited by the CJP leaders have not been independently verified. The latest allegations follow earlier complaints by CJP representatives that their social media accounts and posts had been restricted despite not violating the platform's community guidelines. The CJP, which emerged as a social media-driven movement, has been associated with protests over examination irregularities and demonstrations concerning the Election Commission.
Satirist and lyricist Varun Grover was among those who complained about the removal of content from Instagram. Grover said the musical version of his satirical poem questioning the government's Viksit Bharat 2047 promise had been restricted on the platform. Sharing screenshots of the notification on X, he criticised the removal and sarcastically suggested that the restriction might be lifted in 2047. According to the notification shared by Grover, Instagram restricted the post to comply with a legal requirement under India's Information Technology Act. The political satire platform Deshbhakt also alleged that content critical of the government was being removed from Instagram. In a strongly worded post on X, the platform accused the government of targeting criticism and claimed that even satirical material was facing restrictions. The allegations have renewed questions about how social media platforms distinguish between unlawful content and political criticism when responding to legal requests.
Legal news platform LiveLaw reported that Instagram had removed a reel explaining the Election Commission of India's affidavit filed before the Supreme Court. The organisation said the reel had presented the Commission's version of events and questioned why such explanatory content had been restricted. According to LiveLaw, Instagram informed it that the content had been removed following a legal request, without specifying which provision of law the reel had allegedly violated. The platform also pointed out that the same video remained available on YouTube.
The incident added to concerns among journalists and digital publishers about restrictions on news-related content and the lack of detailed explanations accompanying takedown notices. The complaints come amid wider scrutiny of government takedown requests and content moderation practices followed by social media companies in India. Under the country's information technology framework, platforms can be required to restrict access to certain content in compliance with applicable legal provisions. However, activists and content creators have questioned the transparency of such decisions, particularly when notifications do not identify the specific content violation or provide sufficient details about the legal grounds for removal. Previous complaints have also highlighted difficulties in challenging restrictions and obtaining explanations from social media platforms.
The latest allegations have brought renewed attention to the relationship between online political expression, government requests for content removal and the responsibility of technology companies to explain their moderation decisions. There was no independently verified evidence in the reports establishing the scale of the alleged crackdown or confirming that every restriction cited by the complainants had been ordered by the Centre.
Published by HT Digital Content Services with permission from Millennium Post.