Telegram founder Pavel Durov
Telegram founder Pavel Durov Instagram/durov

Telegram founder Pavel Durov publicly accused Reliance of cutting off access to the messaging app for more than 150 million users on June 16, 2026. The block, ordered by the Indian government, was set to last until midnight on June 22.

Durov did not mince words. 'This punishes 150M+ ordinary Telegram users in India, not the insiders who leaked the exam materials,' he said, adding that 'the leaks just moved to other apps.' The allegation placed Reliance Jio, a subsidiary of Mukesh Ambani's conglomerate Reliance Industries Limited (RIL), at the center of a debate that stretches well beyond exam integrity: who controls what India's 1.4 billion people can access on their phones, and at whose instruction?

Blanket Ban on Telegram in India

Reliance Jio, along with other major Indian telecom providers, began implementing the government's blocking directive on June 16, leading to widespread access disruptions across the country. Telegram became inaccessible to millions of users that same day after the major telecom operators complied with the order, which was issued by India's Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY).

The block did not stop at the network level. Telegram was also removed from the Google Play Store and was in the process of being delisted from the Apple App Store in India. That two-pronged approach, network-level blocking by carriers and app store removal, left users with few options. Some sought to circumvent the restrictions using virtual private networks (VPNs), and a number of users reported on social media that the app remained accessible through those means.

The Indian government's legal basis for instructing private carriers to execute the block rests in the Information Technology Act, a law that grants MeitY broad authority to direct intermediaries, including telecom operators, to restrict access to platforms deemed a threat to public order or national security. Reliance Jio's compliance with that directive was procedurally standard. What makes it notable is the scale of the disruption and the identity of the company carrying it out.

Which Reliance Is Durov Referring To?

Durov's allegations against Indian telecom major and Meta branched into a discussion of its own.

'Such abuse of global Internet routing is alarming. I wouldn't be surprised if Reliance/WhatsApp were also behind the recent lobbying effort to ban Telegram in India,' he had said.

While Durov accuses Reliance and Meta by extension for the Telegram ban in India, many questioned which Reliance is the Telegram founder referring to. Reliance Communications and Reliance Industries are separate entities and Meta is a minority investor in Reliance Jio, India's largest telecom operator. An unnamed senior telecom industry source clarified that Durov has confused Reliance Communications with Reliance Jio.

'The sabotage seems intentional, as Reliance has ignored multiple reports. This may be part of a competitive war, as Reliance is partially owned by Meta, the company behind WhatsApp,' Durov said in a social media post on X.

According to screenshots shared by the Telegram CEO, the autonomous system number cited in the alleged BGP-routing issue belongs to Reliance Communications, which is not part of Reliance Industries. Since RIL and Reliance Communications share the same name, it explains Durov's confusion.

'Meta is only a minority investor in Jio and has no role in its day-to-day operations or management. Conflating the two demonstrates either a lack of understanding of the sector or a deliberate attempt to spread misinformation,' the source was quoted as saying by Indian news agency PTI.

As for the relationship between Meta and Reliance Industries, which is owned by Indian billionaire Mukesh Ambani, Facebook Overseas acquired a 30 per cent stake in Reliance Enterprise Intelligence Ltd (REIL) in early 2026 and 9.99 per cent stake in Reliance Digital and Jio Platforms in 2020. Most recently, Meta partnered with Reliance for its first 168-megawatt AI-enabled data centre in Gujarat.

Telegram commands a user base of more than 150 million in India, making the country one of the platform's largest markets globally. WhatsApp, by contrast, has long dominated India's messaging landscape. A week-long block on Telegram, during which users cannot download the app from official stores and cannot access it through the two largest carrier networks, creates a functional advantage for any competing platform that remains live.

Indian Government's Reason Behind Telegram Ban

The Indian government's stated rationale centers on the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-Undergraduate (NEET-UG), India's premier medical school entrance examination. The National Testing Agency (NTA), the government body responsible for administering the exam, formally requested the Union government to block Telegram for one week ahead of the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination.

The NTA's concern was specific. Various Telegram channels had been advertising what they claimed were leaked exam papers, demanding payment from students desperate for an edge in one of the world's most competitive admissions processes. 'To all parents, I say, please protect your child from financial fraud and from the panic these rackets are designed to create,' the NTA stated.

The scale of the underlying problem is significant. Approximately 2.28 million candidates appeared for the NEET-UG exam on May 3, 2026. The exam was subsequently canceled following allegations of a paper leak, making the re-examination scheduled for June 21 both politically sensitive and logistically enormous.

The NTA's position was that Telegram's group and channel architecture made the platform particularly susceptible to organised fraud networks. Cheating rackets used those channels systematically to defraud candidates, the agency alleged. Whether those same rackets moved their operations to other platforms after the block was imposed is precisely what Durov claimed in his public statement: 'The leaks just moved to other apps,' Durov noted.

Effectiveness of the Block Under Question

The practical effectiveness of the Indian government's approach drew immediate skepticism. Digital rights advocates argued that blocking a platform used by more than 150 million people to address the conduct of a comparatively small number of bad actors was a disproportionate response. The move was described as unprecedented in the Indian context, given the sheer size of Telegram's domestic user base and the platform's reach into professional, civic, and educational communities far removed from exam fraud.

Reports of continued access through VPNs further undermined the operational logic of the block. If the cheating rackets driving the fraud had the technical sophistication to organise across encrypted channels and coordinate payment collection from students, the assumption that a carrier-level block would deter them, rather than merely inconveniencing ordinary users, was questioned widely.

Reliance Jio had not issued a public response to Durov's specific allegations as of the time of publication. The Indian government has not publicly addressed the structural conflict-of-interest argument raised by critics in connection with the Reliance-Meta equity relationship. The NTA's stated position is that the temporary block was a necessary and targeted measure to protect the integrity of an examination taken by millions of medical school aspirants, and to shield students and families from financial predators operating on the platform.

Read more