Court: suppose once paper is leaked, and it can become viral how can you in real time basis? Once complaint is received…by the time action is taken damage is done. What real time surveillance is there on your platform?

Court: your main thrust is I am doing what I can do…I have put AI tools in place, human intervention is there.

Court: as far as blocking of channel is concerned you dont have a problem. your grievance today is can you block entire app under 69A

Court: you may have taken down…there are things like dynamic injunction. But can you stop the app itself to curb the misuse is the question?

Court asks if telegram is significant social media intermediary?

Mehta says yes

Dhruv Mehta: even their counter has a chart, their heading of non-complaince is zero

Court: let us hear govt, they have to justify the order.

Dhruv Mehta submits 1300 urls have been taken down

Whatever action you have taken does it justify exercise of power?…there may be certain things you have not done: Court

Mehta: let us consider both what i have done and not done

Court: it is about sufficiency.

Court: we are all alive to situation. There are so many students who got affected. The aspect is to curb on instance can you ban the whole app? Let us focus on that. There is a power. That power can be exercised. To what extent can it be exercised?

Court: let us focus on the order. Let us identify whether 69A conditions are met in letter and spirit. Real concern here it seems is if info amounts to application. You are concerned with sweeping order of banning an app

Dhruv Mehta points to particular para: its all right if you reach conclusion after noticing what transpirrd on June 9. But you cant ignore

Court: it says that you have not effectively curbed activity

Mehta: its a play with words

Court: what was discussion going on b/w centre and you is not in context of 69A. 69A is different.

Mehta: when you make allegation I am not doing anything is it not necessary to consider…

Court: where is allegation u arent doing anything?