Representatives of messaging app Telegram were called in for meetings “at the highest levels” and warned about the misuse of the app’s features that facilitate “paper leak frauds” before a blanket ban was issued, Abhishek Singh, Director-General of the National Testing Agency (NTA), told The Hindu on Wednesday (June 17, 2026).

The Electronics and Information Technology Ministry blocked nationwide access to Telegram until June 22. Additionally, it ordered Telegram to disable its message-editing feature for all Indian users until June 30.

Mr. Singh said the primary motive behind government intervention is to halt the spread of engineered fake leaks that can spread panic among the students ahead of the National Entrance Cum Eligibility Test (NEET) re-exam scheduled on June 21. 

“The government had previously approached Telegram regarding the misuse of two specific features, including making edited timestamps visible in Telegram groups and addressing the issue of lack of stringent naming filters for its groups. However, Telegram did not alter its system then,” Mr. Singh said. 

NTA was concerned about the modus operandi used by bad actors on Telegram to trigger mass panic by fabricating evidence of question paper leaks. Cheating syndicates have been systematically exploiting a specific loophole in Telegram’s group and channel synchronisation features. 

For instance, a bad actor can create a public Telegram channel and link it to an associated group. Days before an exam, the administrator can upload a random PDF file on the channel, name it provocatively such as “NEET Question Paper Leaked”. The day after the actual exam, the operator then can use Telegram’s edit feature to replace the dummy PDF with the actual question paper. While the post inside the channel shows an ‘edited’ tag, the linked group retains the timestamp of the original post made days earlier. This creates a highly convincing illusion that the actual question paper was available on the platform before the exam began, sparking panic.

“After the ban, Telegram founder Pavel Durov said on X that they are making the ‘edited’ label more visible to prevent backdating scams. However, this change is still not visible on the app,” Mr. Singh said. “Why can’t Telegram simply fix its metadata so that timestamp changes are accurately reflected in linked group chats,” he asked.

Pointing out that Telegram allows creation of alleged criminal groups with questionable names such as “Paper Leak NEET Mafia”, Mr. Singh said the app has to “adhere to norms”.

The NTA Director-General argued that the lack of stringent naming filters and the ability to rapidly obscure participant identities have turned the platform into a hub for various alleged illegal activities, ranging from paper leaks to investment fraud. On June 15, The Hindu had reported that Ahmedabad Police Cyber Cell had busted a fake NEET paper leak claims racket which used Telegram. 

Integrity vs liberty

The move to ban Telegram has evoked a debate among government authorities, technical experts, and legal analysts over examination integrity versus digital liberties.

Manindra Agarwal, Director, IIT-Kanpur, said that because NEET exam papers have been leaked, NTA’s motive is to stop the spread of fake news. “Telegram is a popular app, but it should also act in a responsible way especially if it has been requested to tweak certain features,” Mr. Agarwal said. 

However, cybersecurity and policy experts have raised red flags over taking an absolutist approach against the platform.

Nisarga Adhikary, a cybersecurity researcher at IIT-K, warned that a blanket ban or heavy-handed restriction “optimises for visibility rather than actual risk reduction”.

“Telegram is relatively mainstream and at least has identifiable infrastructure, legal points of contact, and a large amount of public activity,” Mr. Adhikary said. “If determined actors are forced off it, they do not disappear. They migrate to platforms with stronger anonymity properties... pushing adversaries into darker corners of the ecosystem may simply reduce visibility into it.”

Mr. Adhikary also pointed out the technical impracticality of demanding immediate software overhauls, stating it is not easy for Telegram to alter integral functions such as editing or archiving on short notice. He noted that the true edit timestamps are saved on Telegram’s servers and could possibly be accessed by law enforcement through standard legal notices.

Legal experts suggest that a narrow, feature-specific restriction — rather than a blanket ban — might stand scrutiny. Monalisa Nanda, team manager at the Centre for Law, Policy and Governance, suggested that a temporary, feature-specific restriction on Telegram during a narrow exam window satisfies the legal benchmarks established by the Supreme Court.

“A surgical restriction targeting only the message-editing function during exam windows would protect public interest while keeping the broader platform functional for regular users,” said Ms. Nanda. 

The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), in a statement, argued that the government’s ban on Telegram is a band-aid solution and a disproportionate answer to exam fraud. “At the outset, it is important to note that Section 69A and the Blocking Rules of 2009 framed under it allow the government to block access to specific “information” on a computer resource. They do not extend to switching off an entire intermediary, still less to ordering a company to redesign its product by removing a feature for a whole country,” the IFF said. 

IFF argued that the ban of Telegram is reactive and ineffective and will punish ordinary users instead of addressing the systemic source of exam leaks. “This blocking comes in the final days of NEET preparation, when thousands of students depend on Telegram for study groups, doubt-clearing, and shared resources. Also, it is important to consider that the source of exam papers leak will occur from inside the system, among insiders and across the printing and logistics chain, with the platform being the most downstream channel for distribution. Hence, switching off Telegram, is merely a deflection from the repeated failures that will continue while media attention is directed towards this Telegram ban,” it added. 

IFF demanded that the government’s order and the NTA’s recommendation behind the ban be made public with reasons. “The government should state the legal basis for the message editing direction, or withdraw it; it should confirm whether Telegram was given a hearing under the Blocking Rules, and place the committee’s record before any court that hears a challenge; and it should lift the platform-wide restriction and rely on the targeted takedowns the NTA itself credits with containing the harm,” the statement said.