Pavel Durov Accuses Reliance Of 'BGP Hijacking' Telegram, Ends Up Targeting Wrong Company

Pavel Durov accused Reliance of sabotaging Telegram access during India's NEET-related ban, but network data suggests the claim may involve a crucial case of mistaken identity.

Experts question Durov's allegations, citing confusion between Jio and RCom.

Source : ABPLIVE AI

Show Quick Read

Key points generated by AI, verified by newsroom

• Telegram CEO accused Indian Reliance of sabotaging global access.
• Experts questioned if Durov confused two distinct Reliance entities.
• Reliance Jio denied allegations of BGP manipulation, ensuring standards.
• The routing dispute followed India's temporary Telegram restriction.

Telegram founder and CEO Pavel Durov has escalated his criticism of India's temporary restriction on the messaging platform by accusing a Reliance-linked network of interfering with Telegram's internet traffic. However, experts and internet observers have raised questions about whether Durov may have conflated two separate Reliance entities while making the allegation.

The controversy comes days after the Indian government temporarily restricted Telegram until June 22 following recommendations from the National Testing Agency (NTA) and the Ministry of Education. Authorities said the move was aimed at preventing the circulation of leaked material and disrupting organised cheating networks ahead of the NEET-UG 2026 re-examination. Telegram has challenged the decision before the Delhi High Court, while Durov has repeatedly criticised the government's action.

In a tweet, Durov alleged that "Indian telecom Reliance" was sabotaging access to Telegram for users outside India through a technique known as Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) hijacking. He claimed the disruption affected users in countries including the UAE and suggested the incident may have been linked to competitive interests involving WhatsApp.

Indian telecom Reliance is sabotaging access to Telegram for millions of users OUTSIDE India (including the UAE) via a rogue method called BGP hijacking.

The sabotage seems intentional, as Reliance has ignored multiple reports.

This may be part of a competitive war, as…

— Pavel Durov (@durov) June 16, 2026

Durov further pointed to Meta's investment relationship with Reliance, implying that Telegram's rival could indirectly benefit from actions taken against the platform.

The Reliance Confusion

The central issue with Durov's allegation is that the network identifier cited in publicly circulated routing data appears to be AS18101, an autonomous system historically associated with Reliance Communications Ltd (RCom), not Reliance Jio. That distinction is significant.

Reliance communications has been out of business for years. 🤦🏽‍♂️

The Reliance Industries Ltd’s mobile business that has partnered with Meta for some projects is called Jio.@grok can you please explain this to him?

— Vineeth Naik 🇮🇳 (@vineeth_naik) June 16, 2026

Reliance Communications, formerly controlled by Anil Ambani, exited the consumer mobile business years ago and entered insolvency proceedings in 2019. Reliance Jio, on the other hand, is India's largest telecom operator and is part of Reliance Industries, led by Mukesh Ambani.

Meta invested in Jio Platforms in 2020, creating the link that Durov referenced in his social media posts.

Several network observers noted that while AS18101 appeared in routing records connected to Telegram prefixes, the autonomous system has historically been associated with Reliance Communications rather than Reliance Jio. This has led to questions about whether Durov incorrectly attributed the incident to the wrong company.

What Is BGP Hijacking?

BGP serves as the routing system of the internet, directing traffic between networks across the world.

When a network incorrectly announces ownership of internet routes that do not belong to it, traffic can be misdirected, intercepted, or disrupted. Such incidents are commonly referred to as BGP hijacks.

However, internet infrastructure experts caution that not every unusual route announcement is evidence of deliberate sabotage. Similar incidents can occur because of routing errors, misconfigurations, outdated filtering practices, or operational mistakes.

Public routing data cited by network observers showed Telegram-related prefixes being announced through AS18101 around the period when India's Telegram restrictions came into effect. While this indicates a routing anomaly, it does not by itself establish intent.

Jio Rejects Allegations

Reliance Jio has categorically denied any involvement in BGP route manipulation.

According to reports, the company said there was no misconfiguration or manipulation of routes originating from its network and stressed that it follows global internet routing standards. Jio also rejected suggestions that it had attempted to interfere with Telegram's accessibility.

The denial adds another layer to the controversy because Durov's allegation connects a network issue to broader claims about competition in the messaging market.

Telegram Ban Adds Fuel To Dispute

The routing controversy emerged against the backdrop of India's temporary Telegram restriction.

Durov has argued that the government's move punishes more than 150 million users while failing to stop examination leaks. According to him, the material simply migrated to other platforms after Telegram was restricted. Telegram has also highlighted efforts to remove channels linked to exam scams and paper leak operations.

At the same time, the company has been fighting the government's action in court while seeking to demonstrate that it is cooperating with efforts to curb misuse of the platform.

For now, the bigger question is not whether a routing anomaly occurred. Evidence suggests unusual route announcements did take place. The unanswered question is whether the incident resulted from a technical misconfiguration, a legacy network issue involving Reliance Communications, or something more deliberate.

Until independent technical investigations establish intent, Durov's accusation remains a serious allegation rather than a proven fact. What is clear, however, is that a dispute that began over NEET exam integrity has now expanded into a broader debate involving internet infrastructure, platform accountability, telecom networks, and competition in India's digital ecosystem.

Taliban Has Banned Smartphones And Is Smashing Them In Public: Here's The Reason Why

iPhone Fold May Not Make It To Shelves This Year: Here's When It's Coming