Supreme Court Meta WhatsApp data sharing came under sharp scrutiny on Tuesday as the apex court warned Meta Platforms and its messaging service WhatsApp against using user data for advertising under the company’s controversial 2021 privacy policy. The court made it clear that any such data sharing would not be permitted and could lead to the dismissal of Meta’s petition if firm assurances were not provided.
The warning was issued by a bench led by Chief Justice of India Justice Surya Kant, along with Justice Joymalya Bagchi, while hearing challenges related to penalties imposed on Meta and WhatsApp over alleged abuse of market dominance. The case is significant as it touches on user privacy, consent, and the limits of data monetisation by global technology companies operating in India.
Supreme Court seeks binding assurance from Meta
The Supreme Court directed Meta to file an affidavit within a week, giving a clear and unequivocal undertaking that WhatsApp user data will not be shared for advertising purposes. The bench cautioned that failure to submit such an assurance from the company’s management could result in its case being dismissed outright.
“We will not allow you to share a single word of user data. These things must be very clear. If you are ready to give an affidavit, an undertaking from your management that is fine. Otherwise, we will dismiss it. There is no question of sharing data,” the bench observed.
The court said the matter would be taken up again next week, after which further orders would be passed.
Also read: Google Photos Me Meme Feature Lets Users Create AI-Powered Memes from Selfies
Court criticises WhatsApp’s consent framework
The bench also strongly criticised the design and language of WhatsApp’s opt-in and opt-out options under its 2021 privacy policy, saying they were not understandable to ordinary users.
“The language of your policy is such that an ordinary user cannot understand it. What kind of option are you giving? Imagine a street vendor a poor woman sitting on the street selling fruits. How will she understand your terms and conditions about opting in or opting out?” the court said, adding that the policy appeared to be “very cleverly crafted”.
The judges indicated that consent obtained through such complex and technical language could not be treated as informed or voluntary.
Background of the long-running dispute
The dispute over WhatsApp’s 2021 privacy policy has been ongoing for several years and has passed through multiple regulatory and judicial forums. It originated with an investigation by the Competition Commission of India (CCI), which found that WhatsApp abused its dominant position in the messaging market.
In November 2024, the CCI imposed a penalty of ₹213.14 crore on Meta Platforms and WhatsApp, holding that users were forced to accept the updated privacy policy on a “take-it-or-leave-it” basis to continue using the service. The policy required users to agree to wider data sharing with Meta companies.
NCLAT rulings and competing appeals
Meta and WhatsApp challenged the CCI’s order before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). In its 4 November ruling, the NCLAT largely upheld the CCI’s findings and the penalty but removed a key restriction that barred WhatsApp from sharing user data with Meta companies for advertising for five years.
The tribunal later clarified that WhatsApp must obtain explicit user consent before sharing data with Meta companies for both advertising and non-advertising purposes and cannot claim open-ended rights over user data.
At the same time, the CCI approached the Supreme Court, challenging the NCLAT’s decision to lift the five-year ban on data sharing for advertising. Meta and WhatsApp also filed petitions before the apex court against both the penalty and the findings against them.
Supreme Court to decide limits of data sharing
Following interim relief granted by the NCLAT in January 2025, the matter reached the Supreme Court, which will now determine the extent to which WhatsApp can share user data under its 2021 privacy policy.
The outcome of the case is expected to have far-reaching implications for data protection, user consent, and the business practices of large technology platforms operating in India.