SGI: it is so manifestly multiplying in effect something done today can effect 3-4 lakh students.

Court: question here is that can you block someone else’s right to protect somebody else?

SGI on finding of proportionality: committee found that restriction was temporary, event linked. As the examination was on June 21. Measure was held to satisfy proportionality

Court: how can we stop of right of other users just because one set of citizens are appearing in exam

SGI: committee concluded that channel specific measures were not sufficient. We are on Thursday, exam is on Sunday.

SGI: entire block of audience of 1lakh can be shifted to another channel. That is their architecture. It is their business choice

SGI says that there was repeated emergence of bots and channels.

SGI; we are not denying that they have not done it. It was found that it was ineffective.

SGI refers to response of Telegram. He says that they were asked to take measures.

SGI: the anonymity enhancing feature, including concealed phone numbers materially impede effective investigation

SGI: telegram further provides an extensive BOT ecosystem providing automatic redirecting to mirror channels. Permits use of user names, large volume file sharing..creates a eco system for dissemination of exam leak material

SGI: once BOT is blocked it is automatically redirected to another BOT. No human intervention needed

Court: automatic?

SGI: yes

SGI says problems lies in the underlying architecture which relies on BOT infra.

These features can be exploited for dissemination leaks, terrorist propaganda which poses serious challenge: SGI