New Delhi:
During the hearing, the Centre defended the ban, arguing that Telegram’s platform architecture makes it difficult to effectively curb the spread of leaked examination material.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the court that the government acted after receiving information from the National Testing Agency (NTA), which indicated a wider pattern of exam-related misuse on Telegram.
The Centre said Telegram had been given an opportunity to be heard before the order was passed, and that its submissions were considered by a review committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary.
The High Court examined whether the government had properly exercised its powers under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act and whether the blocking order met the test of proportionality.
The court also considered whether the order affected the rights of Telegram’s nearly 150 million users in India.
The Centre argued that Telegram’s design differs significantly from other social media platforms. According to the government, a single Telegram user can create up to 40 bots, making monitoring and enforcement more difficult.
It also cited reports from the Ministry of Home Affairs’ I4C unit and claimed that Telegram’s architecture allows channels and bots to re-emerge repeatedly.
Mehta further submitted that Telegram’s privacy policy permits complete deletion of data when an account is removed.
He also referred to reports describing Telegram as a preferred platform for certain terrorist activities and highlighted regulatory action taken against the platform in other countries.
Attorney General R. Venkataramani supported the government’s stand, calling Telegram’s architecture a “Frankenstein” model that justified preventive action.
After hearing extensive arguments, Justice Tejas Karia reserved judgment.
