PMO summons telecom secretary after fake court orders led to blocking of 129 websites: Report

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s office has summoned Telecom Secretary Amit Agrawal to explain how officials ordered internet service providers to block 129 websites on the basis of court orders that have since been found to be fake, two government sources told news agency Reuters. The intervention reportedly marks the highest level of scrutiny so far in a case that has exposed serious gaps in India’s website-blocking process.

The development follows a Reuters investigation, published on Wednesday, which found that the Department of Telecommunications directed internet providers to block 129 illegal betting websites after receiving two purported High Court orders that were later found to be forged. The orders were emailed to officials by people posing as lawyers.

While online betting is illegal in India, the case has raised wider concerns that weaknesses in the country’s content-takedown system could allow falsified court documents to be used to block legitimate websites.

PMO intervenes

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s office summoned Telecom Secretary Amit Agrawal on Saturday to explain the lapse. Agrawal, the senior-most civil servant in the telecommunications ministry, was asked to cut short a trip to another state and appear before the Prime Minister’s Office.

Two government officials with knowledge of the matter said the summons signals intensifying internal scrutiny after the fake court orders came to light. One official said the action taken by the Department of Telecommunications against betting accounts was carried out through relevant field officers.

The Prime Minister’s Office has not issued a public statement on the summons. The Department of Telecommunications also did not respond to Reuters queries when the original findings were published.

How the fraud unfolded

The Department of Telecommunications issued two website-blocking directions this year, on July 21 and September 2. Both directives were published on the department’s website as part of its routine uploads.

The first directive, issued on July 21, followed an email received at 8:59 pm on July 19 containing what appeared to be a Rajasthan High Court order. The document was signed by a person described as an advocate-on-record and instructed that its directions be executed within 24 hours.

Two days later, the government told internet service providers to remove 34 betting websites “as specified in the court order as per the enclosed list,” according to its published communication.

The second purported order was issued in the name of the Allahabad High Court. It carried the court’s logo and seal and included a QR code, which is typically used to allow verification of a document’s authenticity. On September 2, an official told internet service providers to take immediate action to block access to 95 betting websites.

Together, the two directives affected 129 websites, most of them illegal betting platforms.

Courts say orders were fake

Reuters found that neither of the two court orders appeared in the online registration records of the respective courts. The Rajasthan High Court’s registrar said the order issued in its name appeared fraudulent and did not exist on the court’s server.

The Allahabad High Court also found that the purported order in its name had not been issued by the court. Following Reuters’ findings, the court filed a police complaint on November 6, and police initiated an investigation against unknown persons for alleged forgery and cheating.

The documents contained fabricated court logos and seals, as well as a fake QR code. They remained publicly available on the Department of Telecommunications’ website for months, alongside correspondence showing that government officials had ordered internet providers to remove the websites.

On Saturday, one of the fake court orders was still accessible on the government website, while the other had been removed.

Ministry opens internal probe

The telecommunications ministry has initiated an internal investigation into the alleged fraud. The inquiry will review the department’s procedures and consider additional checks before officials act on court orders seeking website takedowns.

A government official with direct knowledge of the matter said the ministry was trying to identify those behind the email addresses used to send the forged orders. The official said the ministry planned to revoke the blocking directions issued on the basis of the forged orders and remove related documents from its website.

The official described the incident as serious and warned that, without stronger safeguards, genuine websites could also be blocked in a similar manner in the future.

Police seek ministry records

Police in Uttar Pradesh have sought records from the telecommunications ministry as part of their criminal investigation. Cybercrime official Ghanshyam Yadav said investigators had asked the ministry for details of its content management system and its digital logs, and had sent it 24 questions.

The police case was registered on November 6 following the Allahabad High Court’s direction, after checks found that one of the purported orders in its name had not been issued by the court.

The investigation is focused on alleged forgery and cheating by unidentified persons who emailed the fake court orders to telecom officials while posing as lawyers.

The case has triggered calls from politicians and activists for stronger verification of court orders before website takedowns are enforced. Critics say the incident shows that India’s content-blocking system lacks adequate safeguards against forged legal documents.

The Modi government and police have often faced criticism for ordering takedowns of online posts or websites, with concerns that such powers can be used too broadly. The current case adds a new dimension: it suggests that even allegedly fraudulent court orders can trigger official blocking directions if verification procedures are weak.

While the websites blocked in this case were illegal betting platforms, the concern is that the same process could be exploited to target legitimate websites, news outlets or political speech if forged court orders are accepted without proper checks.