Smartphone displays Telegram messaging app in India, restricted by government order.
The Delhi High Court has reportedly upheld the central government’s decision to restrict public access to the Telegram messaging platform until June 22. The court dismissed Telegram’s petition, affirming the government’s authority under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act to restrict access, deeming the measure proportionate and the least restrictive option.
Justice Tejas Karia noted that the government’s reasons were sufficient given emergent circumstances and that the due process under Section 69A had been followed. Telegram had questioned the justification for invoking national sovereignty and integrity grounds, particularly concerning the NEET examination, but the court rejected this contention.
This ruling follows the Centre’s assertion that Telegram has become a conduit for criminal activities, likening it to the “new dark web.” The government cited the identification of a Telegram channel, “NEET Mafia,” used for disseminating information related to paper leaks, advance booking, and payment collection for the NEET-UG 2026 examination. The affidavit highlighted Telegram’s architecture, including public channels and username-based identities, as facilitating the rapid spread of unlawful content and concealing user identities.
The government further alleged that the platform has been used for a range of illicit activities, including cyber fraud, financial scams, drug trafficking, child exploitation, piracy, and terrorism. The restriction order specifically addressed concerns surrounding the NEET-UG 2026 examination paper leak, with the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) issuing the order to restrict access until June 22 and disable the message-editing feature for existing posts until June 30.
Telegram had challenged the order, arguing it was unconstitutional and unfairly targeted. The company claimed it had cooperated with authorities, removed flagged content promptly, and taken down over 900 links related to unlawful NEET content. Telegram contended that the blocking order reflected a non-application of mind and that it had complied with applicable rules.
However, the Centre maintained that Telegram’s actions were insufficient to curb suspicious channels, necessitating the temporary restriction to prevent further paper leaks. While the court considered the impact on millions of users, the government argued that preventive action was justified by the scale of the threat. Telegram had filed its challenge on June 17, with the court reserving its verdict on June 18 before pronouncing judgment.
About the Author
