India ordered ISPs to block 129 betting sites after forged court orders
Department of Telecommunications acted on two fake High Court documents in July–September 2026.
Key Takeaways
- India's Department of Telecommunications ordered ISPs to block 129 betting websites on 21 July and 2 September 2026.
- A forged Rajasthan High Court document led to the blocking of 34 sites after an email on 19 July 2026.
- A second forged Allahabad High Court document and correspondence including a letter dated 22 August 2026 led to blocking 95 more sites on 2 September 2026.
- The High Court of Allahabad filed a police complaint on 6 November 2026 and police opened an investigation; no arrests have been made.
India's Department of Telecommunications instructed internet service providers to block 129 websites offering online casinos and betting after relying on two forged High Court orders, Reuters reported. The department issued blocking directions on 21 July and 2 September 2026 based on documents purportedly from the Rajasthan High Court and the High Court of Allahabad.
How the blocks were authorised
A forged document that claimed to be from the Rajasthan High Court was emailed to the Department of Telecommunications on 19 July 2026 and purportedly signed by an advocate-on-record named Aryan Chaudhary. When the message entered the department's system it showed an error, yet authorities issued instructions on 21 July to block 34 gambling sites listed in that forged paper.
The second document, presented as coming from the High Court of Allahabad, included a logo, seal and a QR code intended to confirm authenticity. The QR code instead directed to an irrelevant site showing an unrelated case number. A person identifying himself as advocate Kartikey Pandey used the same case number in a letter submitted to authorities on 22 August 2026. Following additional correspondence at official level, the Department of Telecommunications ordered the blocking of a further 95 betting sites on 2 September 2026.
Investigation and official responses
The Rajasthan High Court registrar confirmed the documents were fraudulent. After Reuters raised concerns, the High Court of Allahabad filed a police complaint on 6 November 2026. Police subsequently opened an investigation into alleged forgery and cheating; no arrests have been made.
"It is fake. It is not a genuine order from High Court of Allahabad," said Ghanshyam Yadav, a senior state cybercrime official.
Reuters's findings flagged weaknesses in India's online content removal mechanism and the processes by which government channels accept court-authenticated material. It remains unclear who created the forged documents or whether artificial intelligence was involved. The episode underscores the powers the state possesses to restrict access to websites and online material and the need for verification before blocking orders are implemented. For background on regulatory procedures, see regulation.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many betting websites did India block after the forged orders?
India blocked 129 betting websites. The Department of Telecommunications issued directions on 21 July 2026 and 2 September 2026 that together affected 129 sites offering online casinos and betting.
Which courts were the forged orders claimed to come from?
The forged documents purported to be from the Rajasthan High Court and the High Court of Allahabad. The Rajasthan High Court registrar confirmed the documents were fraudulent.
What official actions followed the Reuters investigation?
After Reuters raised concerns, the High Court of Allahabad filed a police complaint on 6 November 2026 and police opened an investigation into alleged forgery and cheating; there have been no arrests.
Who were the individuals named in the forged documents?
The Rajasthan-forged document purportedly bore the signature of an advocate-on-record named Aryan Chaudhary. The Allahabad-related correspondence was submitted by a person identifying himself as advocate Kartikey Pandey on 22 August 2026.
Tags
About the author
Eleanor Whitfield
Regulatory Affairs Correspondent
Eleanor Whitfield tracks gambling legislation, licensing decisions, and regulator enforcement across key markets — from the UKGC, MGA, and Germany's GGL to Spain's DGOJ and the state-by-state map in the Americas. The reporting answers three questions precisely: what changed, where, and who it affects, with jurisdictions, effective dates, and penalty figures named exactly as published. Compliance officers and operators read Eleanor Whitfield to know which rulebook moved before their next board meeting.
More from Eleanor Whitfield
