The Union government has blocked access to five over-the-top (OTT) platforms MoodXVIP, Koyal Playpro, Digi Movieplex, Feel and Jugnu for allegedly streaming obscene and pornographic material, invoking powers under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 to maintain public decency and digital compliance.
In a coordinated enforcement move on 24–25 February 2026, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) issued directives to internet service providers to restrict access to five streaming platforms that were found to be disseminating content deemed “obscene, vulgar or pornographic”, officials said.
The affected services were reportedly removed not only from public view in India, but also pulled from app distribution platforms like the Google Play Store and Apple’s App Store following government orders.
According to government sources, the content on these platforms “lacked any meaningful storyline, theme or social message” and featured long sequences of explicit visuals and inappropriate sexual situations, aggravating regulatory concerns.
Officials said the intervention was carried out in strict compliance with Section 69A of the IT Act, which empowers the state to block access to online content for reasons including public order, decency and sovereignty, and under IT Rules, 2021, which require digital intermediaries and publishers to prevent unlawful or harmful material and to set up grievance redressal systems.
Ministry representatives emphasised that prior warnings and notices had been issued in several cases before blocking orders were implemented, with due process followed throughout.
Broader Context
This latest ban is part of a longer pattern of regulatory action by Indian authorities against digital media platforms that fail to align with established laws on obscene content and public decency.
In July 2025, the government blocked at least 25 OTT services and associated websites and apps on similar grounds, including platforms such as ULLU, ALTT, Big Shots App, Desiflix and others collectively representing close to 40 online outlets that were found to be violating sections of the IT Act as well as provisions under the Indian Penal Code and the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act.
At the time, authorities had explained that the objective was to curb easy access to sexually explicit or deviant material particularly where such content lacked age-verification safeguards or involved depictions that exceeded the boundaries of lawful artistic expression.
While the most recent action focuses on lesser-known platforms, the government’s approach reflects a sustained push to ensure that digital streaming services, like traditional broadcast media, comply with national content standards and ethical norms.
Voices and Reactions: Regulation, Rights and Responsibilities
Government officials have defended the blocking orders as a necessary step to uphold public decency, national interest and legal compliance online, stressing that the state has a duty to protect vulnerable audiences — especially minors from exposure to harmful material.
An MIB spokesperson noted that the rules governing OTT platforms were designed not to stifle creativity, but to ensure responsible digital publishing and that intermediaries meet due-diligence obligations.
However, legal experts and digital rights advocates warn that such broad enforcement measures may raise concerns about freedom of expression and censorship, particularly when definitions of “obscenity” are open to interpretation and may vary across cultural and individual perspectives. Critics argue that without transparent criteria and appeal mechanisms, blanket bans risk chilling legitimate content production and consumption.
Industry bodies including representatives from streaming associations and content creators have called for clearer regulatory frameworks that balance creative freedom with responsibility, and for more robust mechanisms for age verification and content classification before resorting to bans.
Meanwhile, some viewers and online commentators have expressed frustration, asserting that adults should have the agency to make personal viewing choices, and that parental controls rather than bans should be prioritised. Others have questioned whether blocking platforms merely drives users to circumvention tools like VPNs or alternate domains, rather than addressing the underlying issues.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
At The Logical Indian, we recognise the legitimate role of regulation in protecting citizens from genuinely harmful content and in maintaining ethical standards in the digital sphere. Yet, we also believe that freedom of expression including creative expression – is a fundamental right that must be respected and judiciously balanced against other societal interests.
While it is important to shield children and vulnerable groups from inappropriate material, regulation should be transparent, proportionate and accompanied by clear definitions and redressal avenues so that creators, platforms and audiences understand the boundaries and can engage constructively.
Heavy-handed bans may unintentionally stifle innovation and debate in an increasingly digital cultural economy.
This moment calls for inclusive dialogue between policymakers, legal experts, creators, civil society and the public to evolve frameworks that protect without curbing fundamental freedoms
