Delhi High Court Calls Telegram Ban ‘Minimum’ Government Action Against Misuse

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday observed that a ban on the messaging platform Telegram would be the minimum action the government could take to address concerns over its misuse. The observation came during a hearing on a petition seeking directions to the authorities to curb illegal activities on the platform.

A division bench of Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora made the remark while examining the government's response to a plea that highlighted the use of Telegram for sharing objectionable content, including child pornography and illegal betting links. The court noted that despite repeated notices, the platform had not fully complied with Indian regulations.

“If the platform is not cooperating, banning it is the least the government can do,” the bench said, adding that failure to act could embolden other platforms to disregard Indian laws. The court directed the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to file a detailed affidavit on the steps taken so far.

Telegram, which claims over 900 million users globally, has faced scrutiny in India for allowing anonymous channels that host illicit material. The platform relies on cloud-based encryption, which critics say makes it difficult to trace offenders. However, the company maintains that it complies with all applicable laws.

The petition, filed by a civil society organisation, argued that Telegram’s lack of a grievance redressal mechanism violates India’s Information Technology Rules, 2021. The court sought the government’s response within four weeks and listed the matter for further hearing in March.

This development comes amid broader global debates on regulating social media platforms. India has previously banned Chinese apps like TikTok and WeChat, but a ban on Telegram would impact millions of Indian users who rely on it for communication and news.

The court’s observation does not amount to a final order. The government is yet to decide on any potential ban. Legal experts say any such action would require careful balancing of security concerns with freedom of expression.