‘Close the malls too’: Is Telegram hurting its own case with nasty replies on X? | india news

Last updated:June 17, 2026, 15:27 IST

The debate over Telegram’s temporary NEET-related ban has taken an unexpected turn, with the platform’s reactions to X becoming a controversy in itself

There were reactions all around for most of Tuesday Center’s temporary ban on Telegram Revolves around a familiar question: Is it fair?

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology’s decision to restrict access to messaging platforms till June 22 ahead of the re-examination of NEET-UG 2026 drew mixed reactions. Many students and parents welcomed the move as a necessary step against the paper leak racket allegedly thriving on the app. Others questioned whether the state was trying to avoid blame.

After about 24 hours, Telegram’s sharp reactions The focus has further shifted away from any meaningful debate on X.

Most notable was its response to Congress MP Karti Chidambaram in which Telegram’s official account apparently suggested closing shopping malls because of thefts inside them or closing roads because some people drive at high speed.

The analogy was probably intended to argue that platforms should not be blamed for the actions of individual users. Instead, it achieved something else: It made headlines on Telegram itself.

The reaction was swift and critical. Social media users questioned whether the comparison trivialized the controversy involving millions of students whose futures were affected by allegations of exam cheating.

One user responded that malls are not allowed to become safe havens for organized theft and argued that platforms are also responsible when illegal activity comes to light again and again.

Another pointed out that while a theft affects individual victims, a paper leak can undermine a competitive exam taken by millions. Others accused Telegram of ignoring concerns about scam channels and fraudulent networks operating on the platform.

But Telegram doubled…

…and then some.

Of course, Telegram was not without supporters. Many users argued that exam leaks originate within institutions and systems, not within messaging apps. Others described the ban as a distraction from the need to identify and punish those responsible for the leaks.

But by choosing to interact through exaggerated analogies and sarcastic replies on social media, Telegram shifted the discussion away from legitimate questions about the government’s reasoning and toward the tone of its response.

Why is Telegram’s response different from other tech giants?

This isn’t usually how big technology companies handle disputes with governments.

Over the past few years, global tech giants operating in India have frequently challenged government directives, but usually through the courts, regulatory processes or formal public statements. WhatsApp challenged India’s traceability requirements in court, arguing that they would weaken end-to-end encryption. X, formerly Twitter, has publicly expressed disagreement when complying with some content-blocking orders in India. Google, Meta, and Microsoft have generally responded through legal channels or regulatory engagement.

It is not unusual for companies to disagree with government actions. It is less common for a forum to use such a disjointed analogy for such a serious issue.

The criticism becomes easier to understand when examined side by side with the government’s rationale for temporarily banning Telegram.

Why did the government target Telegram and not WhatsApp?

Officials have argued that Telegram’s structure differs significantly from most mainstream messaging platforms. Different WhatsAppDesigned primarily around phone-number-based communication and closed groups, Telegram hosts public channels that can attract huge audiences. These channels are searchable and anyone looking for specific keywords can find them.

According to investigators, several channels openly advertised alleged access to NEET question papers and extorted money from students and families in exchange for what they claimed were leaked exam materials.

The government has also focused on a specific Telegram feature that it says enables a sophisticated fraud.

‘Time travel’ trick at the center of NEET paper leak scam

Allows app administrators to edit message While preserving the original timestamp. Investigators allege that scammers took advantage of this feature to create the illusion of a paper leak.

The process was relatively simple. An administrator will upload a generic or irrelevant document a few days before the exam. After the examination is over and the actual question paper comes into circulation, the original file will reportedly be replaced with the actual paper. The post will continue to display the earlier timestamp, allowing the screenshot to be presented as evidence that the paper was available before the trial.

Officials say this tactic was repeatedly used to convince students and parents that question papers had been leaked, which helped fraudsters demand huge sums of money for alleged insider access.

This concern also explains why the government ordered Telegram to temporarily disable message editing in India until June 30.

This difference is important because it helps explain why Telegram and not WhatsApp became the focal point of the action.

Government agencies have not publicly alleged that WhatsApp played a similar role in the alleged fraud network linked to NEET. WhatsApp’s ecosystem is more closed, less discoverable, and more dependent on direct contact between users. Telegram’s public channels, large-scale broadcasting capabilities, and relative anonymity have made it a preferred tool for many communities, from teachers and hobbyists to fraud networks and even cybercriminal groups.

From India to France: Telegram’s growing regulatory problems

This is not the first time Telegram has found itself at the center of a conflict with a government.

The platform has faced regulatory scrutiny in several countries over content moderation, law-enforcement cooperation, and criminal activity conducted through public channels. Authorities in France, Brazil and Russia have taken action against Telegram at various points, while regulators in the United Kingdom have investigated aspects of the platform’s compliance with online security obligations.

Telegram supporters often argue that governments are targeting the messenger rather than the source of the problem. Critics say platforms cannot indefinitely avoid questions about responsibility when illegal activity occurs repeatedly through publicly accessible channels.

In India, both arguments have found an audience.

Big question: Can Telegram be blamed for the exam leak?

National Testing Agency The responsibility of conducting safe examinations remains. If question papers are tampered with, the source of the breach lies within the examination ecosystem rather than the messaging application. This reality has not changed because Telegram is banned.

Also, the platform’s reactions to X haven’t helped its public perception.

Before Telegram entered the debate, the conversation largely focused on whether the government had overstepped and whether platform-level restrictions were appropriate. Following the company’s social media intervention, attention has increasingly shifted to Telegram’s conduct.

For a company seeking to defend itself against government action, this may be its own goal.

read more