New Delhi: The Delhi High Court Friday upheld the Centre’s decision to temporarily block the instant-messaging application, Telegram, in view of its misuse by third parties with respect to the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test-Undergraduate (NEET-UG) 2026.
Invoking Section 69A of the Information of Technology Act, 2000, which allows the Centre to issue directions for blocking public access to any information through any computer resource, in the interests of sovereignty, integrity, defence, and security of the nation, a bench of Justice Tejas Karia said that the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology was “empowered under Section 69A of the IT Act to issue directions for blocking public access to Telegram”.
The HC also said that according to the definitions of “computer resource” and “computer” under the IT Act, it is evident that information generated, transmitted, received, stored, or hosted through such software-based infrastructure falls under Section 69 as well.
“An application or platform performs logical, arithmetic and memory functions through electronic, magnetic or optical impulses, and includes input, output, processing, storage, computer software and communication facilities connected with a computer system or computer network,” the HC said while adding that the Centre was well within its rights to issue the blocking order to Telegram.
Apart from this, the HC also invoked the doctrine of proportionality, which requires the authority imposing restrictions upon fundamental rights to identify the legitimate objective sought to be achieved by the restriction. In doing so, the court noted that the requirements of proportionality outlined in the Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling stood fulfilled, including a rational nexus between the objective and the measure adopted and the necessity of the measure, given the facts and circumstances of the case.
Taking note that Telegram permits the large-scale addition of users to channels and groups, the court said, “The platform architecture of Telegram is conducive to amplification and mass dissemination of content, enabling information to reach a substantial number of users within a short span of time.” Consequently, any unlawful content, if circulated on Telegram, is capable of being amplified rapidly and likely to give rise to a public order situation, the HC said.
Unlike other conventional platforms, Telegram is entirely cloudbased, and enables the storage and retrieval of large volumes of content, the court also pointed out, adding that it hosts an extensive bot ecosystem, which facilitates automated dissemination of content and other activities without human intervention. “The use of usernames in lieu of phone numbers enables concealment of user identifiers and facilitates the rapid dissemination of content, including content that may be illicit in nature,” the court also said.
Telegram’s case & Centre’s defence
Telegram had argued before the court that it had fully cooperated with the Centre in the matter, and said that it did not allow its services to be used for examination fraud, cheating, impersonation, or even for the sale and distribution of examination-related material.
Telegram had said it has an extensive content-moderation framework, comprising artificial intelligence and machine-learning tools, hash-based detection mechanisms, and human moderators who proactively review content and remove unlawful material.
Users on the app are also allowed to report suspicious content through in-app reporting tools, anti-spam systems, privacy controls, and warning labels such as “scam” and “fake” to prevent misuse, Telegram had contended, pointing to strict enforcement measures like content removal, account restrictions and permanent bans that were imposed upon violators earlier.
Telegram had argued that since the blocking order did not contain any proper reasons for imposing such an extreme measure, and disregarded its impact on over 150 million people, millions of students and educators who use Telegram for lawful and constitutionally protected purposes, including sharing study material and educational resources for NEET preparation, would be affected by this move.
On the other hand, Centre had said that Telegram is materially distinguishable from other intermediary platforms due to its “distinctive technical architecture, including cloud-based infrastructure, large public broadcast channels, automated bot ecosystems, concealment of user identifiers, large-volume file-sharing capabilities, and self-destructing messages, which cumulatively create an ecosystem”.
The Centre also argued that Telegram’s message-editing feature allows posts to be altered in a manner which may make content appear as if it’s published on an earlier date.
In the context of examination fraud, such functionality can pose a grave threat to public order affecting a large number of students, the government had argued, while adding that Telegram in its 17 June response, had acknowledged that due to unavailability of its services in India, it could not prevent users from bypassing blocking measures through virtual private networks (VPNs).
“Telegram further stated that it was in the process of introducing a more prominent ‘edited’ label, thereby proposing an architectural change that would require considerable time,” the Centre had told the Delhi HC.
Background of the case
The case arose from a letter issued to the MeitY on 21 May by the National Testing Agency, a body tasked with conducting efficient, transparent and international-standard tests to assess the competency of candidates for admissions to premier higher education institutions. The letter pointed to the misuse of the Telegram app by third-parties for the NEET-UG 2026 exam.
Days later, on 1 June, MeitY held a meeting with Telegram to discuss the nature and scale of the misuse of the app, in relation to the entry exam for undergraduate medical courses. Although Telegram said it sent a detailed response a day after the meeting, the MeitY shared a list of URLs relating to Telegram channels, accounts and bots, which were allegedly involved in fraud related to the NEET-UG exam. On 5 June, Telegram acknowledged this and said the said URLs have been taken down since.
Subsequently, on 16 June, MeitY passed an order based on the request of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), and the NTA, under Section 69 of the IT Act saying that Telegram will be blocked across India, till 22 June, after the rescheduled entrance exam. In addition to this, Telegram was asked to disable its message editing feature till 30 June.
After giving an opportunity to the parties to be heard on 17 June, the Ministry passed the final order on 18 June, confirming its earlier order, and saying that fraud had taken place in relation to the NEET UG exam, this year, by facilitating misleading information.
Despite repeated takedown measures, the Centre said, unlawful channels continued to re-emerge through backup channels and bots on Telegram, which made “narrower” measures ineffective.
Taking note of the fact that the NEET-UG 2026 reexamination was scheduled to be conducted on 21 June, the committee constituted under Rule 7 of the Information Technology (Procedure Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009, concluded that a temporary platform-wide blocking of Telegram, along with disabling of the message-editing feature, was necessary and proportionate for protecting the integrity of the examination and maintaining public order.
(Edited by Viny Mishra)
Also read: Centre makes ‘Frankenstein’ jab at Telegram, HC questions govt on rights of users in app ban hearing