The government on June 16 temporarily blocked Telegram until June 22. (File Photo)Telegram Ban Judgment: The Delhi High Court on Friday upheld Centre’s order to temporarily block the Telegram messaging app until June 22 over NEET paper leak concerns.
“Given the emergency nature of the impugned order, the reasons supplied in arriving at the decision were sufficient. Respondent no.1 (Centre) has strictly followed the procedural steps as required under Section 69 A of the Act and the challenge in the interim order on the ground of non-communication of reasons cannot be sustained,” the court held in its order.
It further added that the test of proportionality has been satisfied as the requirements, namely identification of legitimate objective, existence of rational nexus between the objective and the measure adopted, necessity of measure in the facts and circumstances of the case, and adoption of the least restrictive measure available, have been adopted.
What happened during hearing? During the hearing, the Centre told the court that the public interest involved in the matter extends to “crores of students” whose concerns over alleged question paper leaks cannot be ignored. It argued that Telegram’s message editing feature, which allows users to modify the posts, could be misused to create a false impression that examination papers were leaked before the exam. On the decision to temporarily ban the platform, the court asked Centre how the communication rights of the users could be curtailed just because one group of citizens is appearing in examination.
Telegram Ban: The Ministry of Electronics and IT blocked Telegram in India until June 22 at the request of the National Testing Agency (NTA), responsible for conducting the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET), after the country’s key undergraduate medical entrance exam was cancelled earlier this year due to widespread paper leak allegations and irregularities.
The court has remarked that, considering the emergency nature of the order, the reasons provided were sufficient and that the challenge based on the alleged non-communication of reasons could not be sustained.
Dismissing Telegram's plea, the court has held that the Centre had complied with the procedural requirements under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act while issuing the blocking order against Telegram.
The Delhi High Court has dismissed Telegram's plea challenging Centre’s order to temporarily block the platform until June 22 over NEET paper leak concerns.
Breaking- Delhi High Court upholds temporary ban on Telegram
Bench: We have also held that the test of proportionality has been satisfied as the requirements namely identification of legitimate objective, existence of rational nexus between the objective and the measure adopted, necessity of measure in the facts and circumstances of the case, and adoption of the least restrictive measure available has been adopted.
Accordingly, the measures adopted by respondent number 1 under the orders constitute least restrictive measure for achieving the stated objective. Accordingly, the action of respondent number 1 in temporarily blocking the public access to Telegram cannot be held to be disproportionate. In view of the above analysis, the present petition along with the application is hereby dismissed.
Bench: Both the impugned order as well as the final order are founded upon relevant material duly considered by the respondent number 1, and the conclusion recorded therein are supported by reasons set out in the orders. Accordingly, it is held that the orders do not suffer from the vires of non-application of mind as alleged by the petitioner.
We have also held that under Section 2 (1) (v) of the IT Act, there is no reason to exclude the application or platform from the ambit of the expression information. The definition of computer resource and computer make it evident that the information generated, transmitted, received, stored or hosted through the software-based infrastructures falls within the ambit of Section 69A of the Act. An application or platform performs logical, arithmetic, and memory functions through electronic, magnetic or optical impulses and includes inputs, output, processing, storage, computer software and communication facilities connected with a computer system or computer network. Accordingly, this court is of the view that respondent no. 1 was empowered under Section 69 A to issue directions for blocking the public access to Telegram.
Judge presides
Bench: Given the emergency nature of the impugned order, the reasons supplied in arriving at the decision were sufficient. Respondent no.1 has strictly followed the procedural steps as required under Section 69 A of the Act and the challenge in the interim order on the ground of non-communication of reasons cannot be sustained.
The court had reserved its judgment yesterday after hearing the arguments from Centre and Telegram.
On the decision to temporarily ban the platform, the court asked Centre how the communication rights of the users could be curtailed just because one group of citizens is appearing in examination.
During the hearing yesterday, SGI Mehta had flagged a law-and-order issue if the ban is revoked. "My concern is potential law and public order issue. Telegram will not be able to take the responsibility if something happens," Mehta had said.
Yesterday, arguments were concluded by Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta on behalf of Centre and Senior Advocate Dhruv Mehta for Telegram.
Justice Tejas Karia will deliver judgment at 10:30 AM.
