Telegram Is ‘Like Frankenstein’: Centre Defends Move To Block Platform

The Indian government has compared Telegram to a monster in court, calling it ‘the new dark web’ as it defends a move to block the platform.

The Centre told the High Court today that the messaging app has become a haven for criminals. They argued Telegram is no longer just a chat tool. It is a gateway to illegal activity.

The statement lands amid a broader crackdown on encrypted platforms in India. The government says the move is about public safety, not censorship.

Government’s Frankenstein Analogy in Court

The government’s legal team did not mince words. They told the court that Telegram is ‘like Frankenstein’ a creation that has turned on its makers. The analogy was deliberate. It frames the platform as something that started as a communication tool but has evolved into something dangerous.

This is not the first time the government has used stark language against a tech company. But the Frankenstein comparison signals a deeper frustration. The government argues that Telegram’s design makes it hard to police. End-to-end encryption, while protecting user privacy, also shields criminals.

The court hearing today focused on the government’s right to block the platform under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act. That section allows the government to block public access to any information in the interest of sovereignty and security. The government says Telegram’s misuse falls squarely under that provision.

Telegram’s Role as a Gateway to Dark Web

The government’s key claim is that Telegram has become ‘the new dark web.’ That is a serious charge. The dark web is a part of the internet not indexed by search engines. It requires special software to access. It is known for hosting illegal markets and forums.

Telegram, by contrast, is a mainstream app. It has millions of users in India. But the government says criminals have turned it into a dark web portal. They use Telegram channels to post links that lead to dark web forums. Users can click a link inside Telegram and land on a hidden marketplace.

This works because Telegram allows large groups and channels. It also supports file sharing and bots. Criminals exploit these features. They create channels that act as directories for dark web sites. They share links that are updated frequently to evade takedowns.

The government argues that Telegram’s encryption makes it impossible to track these links before they spread. By the time authorities find a channel, the criminals have moved to a new one. This cat and mouse game is at the heart of the legal battle.

Criminal Adoption of the Platform

The Centre told the court that criminals have ‘rapidly adopted’ Telegram. This is not a slow trend. It is a surge. The government presented evidence of channels used to share child sexual abuse material, illegal weapons trade, and drug deals. The links in these channels often lead to dark web forums where transactions happen.

Telegram’s appeal to criminals is simple. It is free. It offers strong encryption. It allows anonymous sign ups. You do not need a phone number tied to your real identity. You can use a virtual number or a SIM card bought without ID.

The government also pointed to the use of Telegram for coordinating protests and spreading misinformation. But the main focus in court was on crime. The government says the app has become a tool for organized crime networks. They use it to communicate, share files, and move money.

This is not unique to India. Law enforcement agencies around the world have flagged Telegram as a problem. In Germany, authorities have taken down Telegram channels used by extremists. In France, Telegram has been linked to drug trafficking. But India’s move to block the entire platform is more aggressive.

Legal and Regulatory Implications

Blocking Telegram sets a precedent. India has blocked other platforms before. TikTok was banned in 2020 after border tensions with China. But that was a national security move. Telegram is different. It is an Indian legal battle over encryption and crime.

The government is relying on Section 69A. That law has been used before to block websites and apps. But blocking a messaging app used by millions is a heavier step. The court will have to balance security concerns with the right to privacy. The Supreme Court of India has recognized privacy as a fundamental right. Any block must be proportionate and necessary.

Telegram has not commented publicly on the court proceedings. But the company has a history of resisting government demands. In Russia, Telegram was banned in 2018 after refusing to hand over encryption keys. The ban was later lifted in 2020, but the case showed Telegram’s willingness to fight.

If India blocks Telegram, other countries may follow. The case could set a global standard for how governments treat encrypted messaging apps. It could also push Telegram to change its policies. Or it could drive criminals to other platforms like Signal or WhatsApp.

The government’s case also has implications for other messaging apps. WhatsApp has faced similar pressure in India. The government has asked WhatsApp to trace the origin of messages. WhatsApp has resisted, citing encryption. The Telegram case could strengthen the government’s hand in those negotiations.

What Happens Next

The High Court has not made a final decision yet. Today’s hearing was part of ongoing arguments. The government is defending its order to block Telegram. Telegram’s lawyers will get a chance to respond in future hearings.

If the court upholds the block, internet service providers in India will have to stop access to Telegram. Users will not be able to send messages or use the app. This could affect millions of people who rely on Telegram for news, business, and personal communication.

But a block is not easy to enforce. Telegram can be accessed through VPNs. The government has blocked VPNs before, but with limited success. Tech savvy users will find workarounds. The block will mostly affect ordinary users who do not use VPNs.

The government argues that the block is necessary to stop crime. Critics say it is an overreach. They argue that the government should focus on catching criminals, not blocking an entire platform. They point out that the same encryption that protects criminals also protects journalists and activists.

The court’s decision will be watched closely. It will shape India’s digital landscape for years. It will also send a message to other tech companies about the limits of their operations in India.

For now, Telegram remains accessible in India. Users can still send messages and join channels. But the clock is ticking. The government has made its position clear. Telegram, in its view, is a monster that needs to be contained.