Why Has Pavel Durov Targeted Reliance Over Telegram Access Issues?
The controversy surrounding Telegram’s temporary restriction in India has taken a new turn after Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov accused Reliance of disrupting access to the messaging platform for users outside India.
In a post on X, Durov alleged that changes made within Reliance’s network infrastructure affected internet routing and created access issues for Telegram users beyond Indian borders. According to him, the incident extended beyond the government’s temporary restriction order and may have impacted users in multiple countries.
The allegations have sparked debate across the technology industry, particularly because they raise broader questions about internet infrastructure, telecom networks, and how platform restrictions are implemented.
However, neither Reliance nor independent internet monitoring organizations have publicly verified the claims so far.
What Exactly Did Durov Claim?
According to Durov, Reliance’s network made modifications to internet routing configurations that interfered with Telegram traffic.
He described the incident as a potential case of “BGP hijacking,” a term used in internet networking when traffic is redirected through unintended or incorrect routes.
Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) acts as the routing system that helps internet networks exchange traffic globally. Any incorrect routing changes can potentially affect access to websites, applications, and online services across regions.
Durov claimed that the issue was not confined to Indian users and may have affected Telegram users in other countries as well.
He further alleged that Reliance had been informed about the problem but that the situation remained unresolved.
How Is This Connected To The NEET Re-Examination Controversy?
The allegations come shortly after the Indian government temporarily restricted Telegram until June 22 and directed the platform to disable its message-editing feature until June 30.
The action was taken following recommendations from the National Testing Agency (NTA), which argued that Telegram channels were being used to spread misinformation and fraudulent claims related to the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination.
According to authorities, several groups were allegedly offering fake access to examination papers and exploiting Telegram’s editing capabilities to fabricate evidence of paper leaks after examinations had concluded.
The government described the restriction as a temporary and targeted measure intended to protect examination integrity.
Durov had earlier criticized the decision, arguing that blocking an entire platform penalized millions of legitimate users without addressing the underlying causes of examination related fraud.
Why Did Durov Mention WhatsApp And Jio Platforms?
In his latest comments, Durov also hinted at a possible competitive dimension to the issue.
He pointed out that Meta, the parent company of WhatsApp, has invested in Jio Platforms.
WhatsApp remains Telegram’s largest competitor in India and several global markets.
While Durov stopped short of making direct accusations regarding competitive behavior, his remarks have fueled discussions among technology observers about the relationship between telecom operators, digital platforms, and messaging services.
At present, no evidence has been publicly presented linking the reported access issues to commercial competition.
What Is BGP Hijacking And Why Does It Matter?
BGP hijacking occurs when internet traffic is incorrectly routed through unintended networks.
Such incidents can happen due to technical misconfigurations, operational errors, or deliberate actions.
Because the internet relies on interconnected networks exchanging routing information, even localized routing changes can sometimes create broader disruptions affecting users in multiple countries.
This is why Durov’s allegations have attracted attention from cybersecurity experts and internet governance observers.
However, network incidents often require extensive technical analysis before conclusions can be drawn regarding their cause.
Has Reliance Responded To The Allegations?
As of now, Reliance has not publicly responded to Durov’s claims.
Independent verification from internet monitoring firms and network analysis organizations is also awaited.
Without technical evidence or third-party validation, it remains unclear whether the reported access disruptions occurred as described or whether they were linked to network routing changes within Reliance’s infrastructure.
What Happens Next?
The allegations add a new layer of complexity to an already controversial debate around platform restrictions, digital infrastructure and online communication services.
If independent investigations validate Durov’s claims, the incident could trigger broader discussions about internet routing practices, telecom accountability and the impact of government-directed restrictions on global digital platforms.
For now, the dispute remains a matter of competing claims, with the technology industry awaiting further evidence and official responses.
As scrutiny grows, the outcome could have implications not only for Telegram and Reliance but also for how governments, telecom operators and digital platforms interact during periods of regulatory intervention.
