A legal dispute has arisen between the Indian government and Telegram, just days before the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination, with the Delhi High Court issuing notice on Telegram's challenge to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology's (MeitY) order to temporarily block the messaging platform. The government, citing concerns over misleading claims and fake question papers circulating on Telegram that could undermine the NEET re-examination's integrity, defended its action by presenting evidence of "shocking activities" potentially leading to public unrest. However, Telegram argued that it had cooperated extensively with authorities, promptly acted on flagged content using AI tools, and that the order to block the entire platform, affecting millions of legitimate users, was overbroad and lacked proper reasoning, violating constitutional guarantees. The court is set to hear the matter again on June 18, with the Centre assured not to initiate penal consequences against Telegram until then, while Telegram seeks interim protection and the case highlights the tension between exam integrity and digital freedoms.

A legal dispute has arisen between the Indian government and Telegram, just days before the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination, with the Delhi High Court issuing notice on Telegram's challenge to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology's (MeitY) order to temporarily block the messaging platform. The government, citing concerns over misleading claims and fake question papers circulating on Telegram that could undermine the NEET re-examination's integrity, defended its action by presenting evidence of "shocking activities" potentially leading to public unrest. However, Telegram argued that it had cooperated extensively with authorities, promptly acted on flagged content using AI tools, and that the order to block the entire platform, affecting millions of legitimate users, was overbroad and lacked proper reasoning, violating constitutional guarantees. The court is set to hear the matter again on June 18, with the Centre assured not to initiate penal consequences against Telegram until then, while Telegram seeks interim protection and the case highlights the tension between exam integrity and digital freedoms.

A legal dispute has arisen between the Indian government and Telegram, just days before the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination, with the Delhi High Court issuing notice on Telegram's challenge to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology's (MeitY) order to temporarily block the messaging platform. The government, citing concerns over misleading claims and fake question papers circulating on Telegram that could undermine the NEET re-examination's integrity, defended its action by presenting evidence of "shocking activities" potentially leading to public unrest. However, Telegram argued that it had cooperated extensively with authorities, promptly acted on flagged content using AI tools, and that the order to block the entire platform, affecting millions of legitimate users, was overbroad and lacked proper reasoning, violating constitutional guarantees. The court is set to hear the matter again on June 18, with the Centre assured not to initiate penal consequences against Telegram until then, while Telegram seeks interim protection and the case highlights the tension between exam integrity and digital freedoms.

Just three days before thousands of students are set to appear for the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination, a courtroom battle has erupted over the government's unprecedented decision to temporarily block Telegram, one of India's most widely used messaging platforms.

On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court issued notice on Telegram's plea challenging the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology's (MeitY) blocking order, setting the stage for a crucial legal showdown over the limits of government power in regulating online platforms during examinations.

The matter will now be heard again on June 18 at 2.30 pm. While the Centre has been granted liberty to place its reply and supporting documents on record, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assured the court that no penal consequences would be initiated against Telegram until the next hearing.

The dispute stems from the government's decision to impose restrictions on Telegram following concerns raised by the National Testing Agency (NTA) that the platform was being used to circulate misleading claims, fake question papers and other material capable of undermining the integrity of the upcoming NEET re-examination.

Appearing for the Centre, Mehta strongly defended the government's action, telling the court that authorities had gathered substantial material over the past several weeks.

"Shocking activities are going on in Telegram," Mehta submitted, arguing that the platform had become a vehicle for activities that could potentially trigger public unrest and jeopardise confidence in the examination process.

"We have been dealing with them since May. I have seen the material. We shudder to think what would happen if there is public unrest," the Solicitor General told the bench while opposing Telegram's plea for interim relief.

Telegram, however, mounted a vigorous challenge to the blocking order, contending that the government had ignored months of cooperation between the platform and authorities.

Senior counsel appearing for Telegram argued that since June 1, the company had been in constant communication with government agencies and had acted promptly whenever specific channels or URLs were flagged.

"They wrote an email to me. Within an hour, I replied and informed them of the action taken," Telegram's counsel submitted, questioning the urgency that led to the blocking order being issued on June 16.

According to Telegram, the platform has deployed artificial intelligence tools to detect and remove offending content and has complied with several government requests seeking the blocking of channels allegedly involved in spreading examination-related misinformation.

The company argued that the legal framework under the Information Technology Act permits authorities to block specific information or offending content, not an entire platform serving millions of legitimate users.

"There are some things which are good and some things which are bad. Just because some things are bad, you cannot block the entire platform," counsel argued before the court.

Calling the order overboard and bereft of reasoning, Telegram contended that the designated authorities had failed to independently assess the material before recommending a complete block.

The company further argued that the order reflected non-application of mind and violated constitutional guarantees of equality by imposing sweeping restrictions on approximately 150 million Indian users.

"Banning the platform may not be sustainable in law," Telegram's counsel submitted, seeking interim protection from the court.

The case raises larger questions about the balance between preserving the integrity of high-stakes examinations and safeguarding digital freedoms in an increasingly connected society.

The government's move is unusual because authorities have traditionally targeted individual channels, websites or accounts accused of facilitating malpractice. A platform-wide restriction affecting millions of users represents a far more aggressive intervention.

With NEET once again under intense scrutiny and the re-examination only days away, the Delhi High Court's decision could have significant implications not only for Telegram's operations in India but also for how the government exercises its emergency powers over digital platforms in the future.

All eyes will now be on Thursday's hearing, where the Centre is expected to place on record the material that prompted the extraordinary blocking order.