"Shocking activities on Telegram": SG Tushar Mehta opposes plea in Delhi HC against temporary ban

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought the response of the Central government on a petition filed by instant messaging platform Telegram challenging the decision to ban its operations in India till June 22 in view of the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test undergraduate (NEET-UG) re-exams..Justice Tejas Karia ordered,"Issue notice. Notice is accepted. We have heard the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner as also learned SG Tushar Mehta. Respondents are at liberty to file their reply along with all the documents.".The matter will be heard at 2:30 PM tomorrow..Appearing for the Central government, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta submitted at the outset,"This is order under Section 69A (of the IT Act). The post decisional hearing happened today and order is likely to be passed today. Secondly, I need to put in my reply. I will do it tomorrow 8 AM."Explaining how paper leaks were being facilitated through Telegram, the SG said,"I have to show individual information, individual user ids. They were repeatedly called and told that these are issues and you correct your system. But they failed to do it. I have given examples and shared with them. There are many channels. What is being projected and what is being circulated is that if you give me this much amount, I will give you 5 questions. This is continuous.".Appearing for Telegram, Senior Advocate Dhruv Mehta submitted,"Look at the impugned order. There is complete non application of mind. Exercise started by Ministry from June 1. Meetings have happened there is correspondence from both sides. They supply to me list of various channels, I have implemented that. There is no whisper of those communications in the government's order."Pressing for the matter to be heard tomorrow, the SG said,"Overnight nothing is going to happen. If my lords keep it tomorrow, there is something shocking that I will show.".The Telegram lawyer then said that the law permits blocking of particular information, not the entire platform."This is an overbroad order. There are some things which are good and some things are bad. Just because some things are bad, you cannot block the entire platform...Should I suffer just because they believe certain channels...? Internet service providers have completely blocked access to my platform."He went on to say that there are no grounds in the government order for blocking the platform, something the SG disputed. He further told the Court,"They wrote an email to me. Within an hour, I replied and informed them of the action taken. So, where does this ground come that I have not acted? I have acted bona fide. Proactive measures have been taken. What is the emergency? This has been going on since June 1. Suddenly on June 16 you do this."He further submitted,"My problem is that the impugned order is bereft of any reasoning...My submission is that while they file a reply, there should be an interim order. Banning of the platform may not be sustainable in law.".SG Mehta then claimed that the government has substantial material. "We have been dealing with them since May. For some reason, this platform is being used...I have seen the material. We shudder to think if there is any public unrest."Justice Karia asked,"Any platform can be used by people who...What is the level of illegal activity going on on this platform?".In its writ petition, Telegram argues that the government has singled it out while other social media intermediaries continue to operate without restriction, violating Article 14 of the Constitution of India."[The] impugned Order proceeds on the impermissible premise that misuse by a subset of users justifies blocking of an entire platform. Such an approach, if upheld, would enable indiscriminate suspension of digital platforms, severely undermining constitutional protections of free speech and access to information," the plea contends.The company states that it held multiple meetings with government agencies from May onwards and submitted detailed responses outlining both proactive and reactive moderation measures.Telegram stated that after receiving specific URLs from authorities on June 9, it removed the flagged content within an hour. The company also claimed to have taken down more than 900 links related to unlawful NEET content and deployed artificial intelligence, machine learning tools and manual moderation to identify violations."The Impugned Order is also vitiated by patent non-application of mind. It accepts the allegations of Respondent No. 3 [National Testing Agency (NTA)] at face value, fails to disclose either reasons or the material which the Impugned Order was based to the Petitioners, and fails to consider the documented and state of the art measures taken by the Petitioners [Telegram]," the company said in its writ petition..The government temporarily banned the messaging platform, citing concerns that it had been used by organised cheating networks involved in the NEET-UG controversy. The decision followed the cancellation of the original NEET examination after allegations of widespread paper leaks and irregularities.The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY) issued a direction under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, restricting access to the Telegram platform in India till June 22.Another order was issued directing the platform to disable, till June 30, the message-editing feature for messages already posted.The government has described the measure as necessary to protect the integrity of the re-examination scheduled for 21 June. Authorities argued that Telegram channels were being used to distribute leaked or fake question papers, coordinate fraud and manipulate message timestamps through the platform’s editing feature..Telegram's writ petition has been filed by advocate Madhav Khosla. Along with SG Mehta, Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma and Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Ashish Dixit appeared for the Central government.