The policy change quietly introduced by Meta* will allow the platform to access content that was previously restricted to the sender and recipient.
Instagram’s global policy decision to discontinue end-to-end encryption for its messaging services — challenged before an Indian court — will be taken up by the country's Digital Personal Data Protection, or DPDP, Board, following a court directive.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court intervened in a legal challenge against the Meta Platforms-owned social-media platform, Instagram, last week, mandating the DPDP board to take up the matter.
In an order passed by a two-judge bench comprising Judge Vijay Kumar Shukla and Judge Alok Awasthi, the Madhya Pradesh High Court mandated the petitioner, Parth Sharma, to approach the DPDP board within seven days.
The board has been directed to take up the matter "on an urgent basis" in accordance with the law and pass "a reasoned and speaking order, after affording the opportunity of hearing the petitioner within the next 15 days" before May 6. The court also directed the petitioner to file the decision of the board with the court.
The legal dispute centers on a communication from Instagram, informing users of a major shift in security protocols.
"End-to-end encrypted messaging on Instagram will no longer be supported after May 8, 2026. If you have chats that are impacted by this change, you will see instructions on how you can download any media or messages you may want to keep,"
the social-media platform said.
Effectively, the policy change quietly introduced by Meta will allow the platform to access content that was previously restricted to the sender and recipient.
Sharma, aggrieved by the notification issued by Instagram, told the court that the policy change, which permits access to previously private messages, is a "violation of the right to privacy of the citizens of India." He cited the landmark Supreme Court decision in the Justice K.S. Puttaswamy case to assert that the policy change infringes upon Article 21 of the Indian constitution.
Meta has reportedly attributed the policy change to low adoption of the end-to-end encryption feature and mounting pressure from regulators, law enforcement and child-safety advocates, who contend that encryption hinders the monitoring of illicit activity.
The high court did not immediately rule on the constitutional validity of the encryption removal. Instead, the two-judge bench noted the respondent's argument that the petitioner had filed the case "without approaching the statutory board" established under the DPDP Act of 2023. It directed Sharma to approach the DPDP board.
The matter has been listed for the next hearing on May 6, two days before the scheduled discontinuation of Instagram's encryption service. The outcome will depend on how the board interprets the policy change under the framework of the DPDP Act.
*banned and designated as extremist in Russia
Source: MLex
