India’s Department of Telecommunications (DoT) ordered internet service providers to block 129 betting websites using two court orders that were later found to be forged, according to a Reuters investigation published on November 11, 2026. The documents were presented as official directions from the Rajasthan High Court and Allahabad High Court, but neither court had records confirming that the orders had been issued.
The revelations have raised questions about the verification procedures used by government departments before issuing website-blocking directions. The Allahabad High Court has filed a police complaint over the forged document, triggering an investigation into alleged forgery and cheating. The case also highlights the risks of fabricated legal documents entering official administrative processes and being used to restrict access to online platforms.
How Fake Court Orders Led to 129 Betting Websites Being Blocked
According to Reuters, the DoT issued two website-blocking directions on July 21 and September 2, 2026.
Both directions were accompanied by emails containing what appeared to be court orders from two high courts. The documents instructed authorities to block multiple betting websites.
The first purported order was attributed to the Rajasthan High Court and resulted in directions to block 34 websites. The second was presented as an Allahabad High Court order and led to the blocking of another 95 websites.
Together, the two documents affected 129 websites featuring gambling-related content.
A Reuters review found that neither order appeared in the respective courts’ online registration records.
After Reuters raised questions, the Rajasthan High Court registrar said the document bearing the court’s name appeared to be fraudulent and did not exist on its server.
The Allahabad High Court also determined that its purported order was fake and initiated a police complaint.
The incident demonstrates how documents carrying official-looking court seals and legal language can enter government communication channels without being independently authenticated against court records.
Rajasthan High Court Order Triggered Blocking of 34 Websites
The first forged document was sent to the Department of Telecommunications by email on July 19, 2026, at approximately 8:59 pm.
It purported to be an order from the Rajasthan High Court and was signed by an individual identified as Aryan Chaudhary, described as an advocate-on-record.
However, Reuters found that the email address associated with the purported advocate returned a message indicating that the recipient did not exist.
The document instructed authorities to implement its directions within 24 hours and included language claiming that it had been issued under the seal of the court registrar.
It also referred to a provision of India’s Information Technology Act that allows the government to restrict access to online content under specified circumstances, including national security considerations.
Two days later, on July 21, the DoT instructed internet service providers to block 34 betting websites listed in the purported court order.
The Rajasthan High Court registrar subsequently told Reuters that the document appeared fraudulent and was not available on the court’s server.
The identity of the person who created or transmitted the document has not been established publicly.
Fake Allahabad High Court Order Led to Blocking of 95 Websites
The second document was presented as an order from the Allahabad High Court and was dated August 14, 2026.
It reportedly carried the court’s logo, seal and a QR code intended to make the document appear authentic.
The purported order was signed under the name of Justice Garima Prashad.
However, the QR code did not lead to an official court verification page. Instead, it directed users to an unrelated webpage displaying a case number: Writ-A 30480/2026.
The document was sent to government officials on August 22 by an individual identifying himself as advocate Kartikey Pandey.
Following the communication, government officials exchanged emails and requested an action-taken report. On September 2, the DoT instructed internet providers to block access to 95 betting websites.
Reuters subsequently approached the Allahabad High Court with questions about the document.
The court found that the order was not genuine and filed a police complaint on November 6.
A senior Uttar Pradesh cybercrime official, Ghanshyam Yadav, confirmed to Reuters that the document was fake and that an investigation had been initiated.
The police case documents reportedly indicated that the investigation involved alleged forgery and cheating against unknown persons.
No arrests had been made as of the Reuters report published on November 11.
Police Investigate Forgery and Cheating Allegations
The Allahabad High Court’s complaint has triggered an investigation into the creation and circulation of the forged order.
Authorities are seeking to identify the individuals responsible for preparing the document and submitting it to government officials.
The investigation is particularly significant because the forged document was not merely circulated privately. It was used in an official process that resulted in internet service providers receiving instructions to restrict access to dozens of websites.
The Rajasthan High Court’s registrar has separately confirmed that the order attributed to the court appeared fraudulent.
However, Reuters could not establish who created either document or whether artificial intelligence was used to generate them.
The forged documents reportedly contained court seals, official-looking formatting and legal references. The Allahabad document also included a QR code, although it did not connect to a genuine court record.
The Department of Telecommunications did not respond to Reuters’ questions about how the documents were verified before the blocking directions were issued.
India’s Website-Blocking Mechanism Faces Scrutiny
The incident has raised questions about India’s online content-removal and website-blocking process.
The government has powers under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, to direct the blocking of online information under specified legal grounds and procedures.
These powers are used in matters involving national security, public order and other legally recognised circumstances.
However, the discovery of forged court orders being used in the process raises concerns about the authenticity checks applied to documents submitted to government departments.
The immediate issue is not simply whether authorities can block illegal websites. It is whether the legal documents used to justify such action are genuine and independently verifiable.
The two cases also illustrate the potential consequences of relying on official-looking emails and attachments without confirming the underlying orders with the issuing courts.
A forged document can potentially affect websites, businesses, organisations and individuals if it is accepted as a legitimate legal direction.
Fake Legal Documents Raise Wider Concerns About AI
The investigation comes amid growing concerns about fabricated legal material, including documents and court judgments generated using artificial intelligence.
AI tools can produce convincing-looking legal language, case references and formal documents. However, the technology can also generate inaccurate information, invented legal precedents and fabricated citations.
Indian courts have previously raised concerns about lawyers and litigants relying on non-existent judgments.
The Supreme Court of India set aside a tribunal’s orders in July 2026 after they relied on non-existent legal judgments, according to Reuters.
The current website-blocking controversy is a separate matter, and there is no established evidence that artificial intelligence was used to create the forged high court orders.
Nevertheless, the incident highlights why government departments and legal institutions need reliable methods to authenticate digital documents rather than relying only on formatting, signatures, seals or QR codes.
The Bigger Picture
The blocking of 129 betting websites using forged court orders exposes a vulnerability in the processes used to restrict online content. While governments have legal authority to block websites under specific circumstances, the legitimacy of the underlying orders is fundamental to the process. When forged documents are accepted as genuine, the consequences can extend beyond the websites involved and affect the credibility of official communications.
The incident also highlights the importance of digital verification as AI-generated and digitally manipulated documents become easier to produce. Government departments, courts and internet service providers need dependable ways to confirm legal instructions directly with issuing authorities. The case is particularly significant because the forged documents reportedly carried official-looking seals and a QR code, demonstrating that visual indicators alone cannot establish authenticity.
Looking Ahead
The police investigation will focus on identifying who prepared and circulated the forged orders and how the documents entered the government’s website-blocking process. The Allahabad High Court has already filed a complaint, while the Rajasthan High Court has confirmed that its purported order appeared fraudulent. The DoT has not publicly explained its verification process in response to Reuters’ questions.
The case could prompt closer scrutiny of how court orders are authenticated before internet providers receive blocking instructions. It also raises questions about whether existing procedures are sufficiently robust to prevent forged legal documents from being used to restrict online access. The investigation’s findings may influence how government agencies verify digital communications and handle future website-blocking requests.
SEO Metadata
SEO Title: Government Blocked 129 Betting Websites Using Fake Court Orders
Meta Description: India’s DoT blocked 129 betting websites based on forged Rajasthan and Allahabad High Court orders, prompting a police investigation into alleged forgery and cheating.
URL Slug: government-blocked-129-betting-websites-fake-court-orders
Focus Keyphrase: 129 betting websites blocked using fake court orders
Secondary Keywords: fake High Court orders India, Department of Telecommunications website blocking, Rajasthan High Court fake order, Allahabad High Court police complaint, forged court documents, online betting website ban, India IT Act Section 69A
Get the day’s top stories in your inbox
One concise email. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
