Any Policy Planned To Address ‘Addiction-Causing’ Social Media Architecture, Delhi HC Asks Centre

New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked the Central government whether it is contemplating framing a policy to examine the “addiction-causing” design architecture employed by social media platforms.

A Bench of Justices Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Amit Sharma asked Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma to seek instructions from the Centre on the issue and deferred the hearing by three weeks.

The High Court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Dr Vikas Kathuria, a Professor of Law and Head of the Centre on Law, Regulation and Technology at BML Munjal University, raising concerns over the design architecture of social media platforms, including infinite scroll, autoplay, algorithmically curated and personalised feeds, notification systems and variable-reward engagement features such as “likes”.

During the hearing, ASG Sharma urged the Delhi High Court not to delve into the issue, submitting that the relief sought in the petition fell within the domain of government policy.

The Centre’s law officer suggested that the petition could instead be treated as a representation before the Union government and considered within a time-bound schedule.

“The petition can be treated as a representation. There can be a time-bound schedule for the government (to examine such a representation),” he submitted.

However, the Justice Sambre-led Bench questioned whether the High Court could direct the government to frame a policy within a time-bound period and asked the Centre to clarify whether it was itself contemplating such a policy.

“How can we say, ‘you frame policies in a time-bound manner’? If you are saying so, then it is fine. Are you contemplating framing a policy?” it asked.

In response, ASG Sharma said he would have to obtain instructions on whether the Central government was actively contemplating such a policy.

At this, the court said: “We will defer it by three weeks. You (ASG Sharma) take instructions and tell us whether you are contemplating or not. We will not say anything in the matter. Renotify.”

The PIL contends that the issue is not merely the nature of content carried by social media platforms but the manner in which their underlying architecture is allegedly designed to capture, retain and repeatedly re-stimulate users’ attention.

According to the petition, such engagement-maximising features include infinite scrolling, autoplay and algorithmically curated recommendation feeds, which are alleged to encourage prolonged and repeated use.

The petitioner, who has a six-year-old child, has approached the High Court, raising a matter of “grave public importance” concerning users, particularly children and young people, growing up in a digital environment.

The plea states that the concern extends beyond children, as engagement-maximising design can affect both adult and minor users, while children constitute a particularly vulnerable category.

The petition has arrayed the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Ministry of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, as well as Meta Platforms, Alphabet/Google, Snap, X Corp and Telegram as respondents. It relies, among other things, on the Economic Survey 2025-26, which recorded concerns over digital addiction affecting academic performance and workplace productivity through distractions, sleep debt, and reduced focus.

The petition also refers to concerns regarding mental health among the 15-24 age group and flags concerns over compulsive scrolling, social comparison and gaming disorders. It further submits that existing legal frameworks primarily address unlawful or harmful content and do not specifically examine the design architecture of social media platforms as a distinct issue.

The plea refers to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and the Supreme Court’s judgment in Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, contending that these provisions do not squarely address the design-related concerns raised in the petition.

The petitioner has sought examination of the issue by an appropriate expert body, including an assessment of the impact of engagement-maximising design features and the need for an appropriate regulatory framework.

The petition has been filed through the chambers of advocate Kartika Sharma.

(IANS)