The central government has defended its decision to temporarily restrict access to Telegram before the Delhi High Court, describing the messaging application as a “new dark web” that facilitates the widespread distribution of leaked examination materials.
In a counter-affidavit, the government argued that a complete block of the platform is the only practical solution to halt the dissemination of unlawful content, claiming it is technically impossible to separate legal communications from rampant, repetitive illegal activity.
The legal battle arises from a petition filed by Telegram challenging temporary access restrictions imposed ahead of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test undergraduate (NEET-UG) re-examination on 21 June.
The Government’s Defence
According to the government’s submission, criminals are increasingly using Telegram to share deep web links that connect users directly to dark web forums. The authorities maintained that this system makes it exceptionally difficult for law enforcement agencies to trace and attribute illicit activities.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, argued that the scale of the offending channels demonstrated the platform’s capacity for the mass distribution of unlawful exam-related material. He warned of potential public unrest if the situation escalated.
The Solicitor General also stated that the government had been raising its concerns with Telegram since May. He requested additional time to present sensitive evidence, explaining that when authorities block an offending channel, operators immediately establish new ones and use QR codes to co-ordinate payments for leaked examination questions.
The blocking order was issued under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act. The court heard that a post-decisional hearing has already taken place between Telegram representatives and the government’s nodal agency, and a fresh official order is expected soon.
Telegram Cites Co-Operation and User Impact
Counsel representing Telegram strongly opposed the blanket ban, arguing that the complete suspension of the service is a disproportionate measure that violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
Senior Advocate Dhruv Mehta, representing the platform, argued that the government’s decision ignored the co-operation Telegram had consistently provided. According to the platform, representatives have held several meetings with government officials since 1 June and have promptly removed every specific channel flagged by the authorities.
The platform’s legal team further argued that the government had recorded no emergency to justify such a sweeping ban. They pointed out that more than 150 million users in India—including students, teachers, and businesses—rely heavily on Telegram to access educational materials and conduct legitimate daily operations.
Justice Tejas Karia, presiding over the bench, has asked the government to clarify whether a total block of the platform meets the legal test of proportionality.
