Supreme Court Delays Crucial Hearing in WhatsApp-Meta Privacy Policy Case
The Supreme Court of India has deferred the hearing of petitions filed by WhatsApp and its parent company Meta Platforms, challenging the substantial ₹213.14 crore penalty imposed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI). This penalty stems from the messaging platform's highly contentious 2021 privacy policy update. The matter, which was scheduled for Monday, has now been officially listed for a fresh hearing on 23 February 2025.
Adjournment Due to Counsel Unavailability
A bench led by Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant, which was anticipated to issue directions in this significant case, decided to adjourn the proceedings. This decision was made due to the unavailability of senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who is representing Meta and WhatsApp in this legal battle. The bench, which also includes Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul Pancholi, will reconvene next month to address the complex issues at hand.
Background of the Controversial 2021 Privacy Policy
The case revolves around WhatsApp's 2021 privacy policy update, which permitted the sharing of extensive user data with Meta companies. This data included phone numbers, device information, and interactions with business accounts, presented to users on a "take-it-or-leave-it" basis. The policy ignited widespread alarm regarding user privacy and potential anti-competitive practices in the digital messaging market.
Acting on these mounting concerns, the CCI took suo motu cognisance in March 2021. The regulator ordered a comprehensive investigation to determine whether WhatsApp had abused its dominant position. This probe ultimately culminated in the imposition of the hefty ₹213.14 crore penalty on both Meta and WhatsApp in November 2024.
Supreme Court's Stern Warning and Previous Proceedings
During a previous hearing on 3 February 2025, the Supreme Court issued a clear and stern warning to Meta and WhatsApp. The bench explicitly stated that the companies cannot be permitted to share user data for advertising purposes under the 2021 policy framework. The court directed Meta and WhatsApp to file an affidavit providing a clear undertaking that such data sharing for advertising would cease. Failure to comply, the court warned, could result in the dismissal of their petitions challenging the CCI penalty.
However, after the companies requested additional time to formulate their response to the court's queries, no final order was passed at that time, leading to the current adjournment.
The NCLAT Ruling and Ongoing Legal Challenges
Meta and WhatsApp initially challenged the CCI's penalty order before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). In its ruling on 4 November 2024, the NCLAT largely upheld the CCI's findings and the financial penalty. However, it set aside a key component of the CCI's order: a five-year ban on WhatsApp sharing user data with Meta companies for advertising purposes. The tribunal later clarified that user consent is mandatory for any data sharing, whether for advertising or non-advertising purposes.
Both Meta and the CCI have now approached the Supreme Court. The regulator is challenging the NCLAT's decision to lift the five-year advertising data-sharing ban, while Meta is contesting the core findings of anti-competitive behavior and the penalty itself.
Potential Implications for Meta's India Operations
The outcome of this case holds profound implications for Meta's extensive business in India. If the Supreme Court ultimately upholds the CCI's findings and imposes a strict bar on using data for advertising, it could significantly impact Meta's operational and revenue models in the country. Meta's platforms, including WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram, collectively serve nearly 850 million users in India, making this a landmark case for digital privacy and competition law in one of the world's largest digital markets.
The legal proceedings underscore the ongoing tension between global tech giants and Indian regulatory authorities over data sovereignty, user consent, and fair market practices. The hearing on February 23 is now poised to be a critical juncture in this high-stakes legal confrontation.
