India’s Ministry of Home Affairs has ordered GitHub to take down repositories for BitChat, a decentralized peer-to-peer messaging app, after protesters at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar reportedly used it during a prolonged internet shutdown.
What Happened
The takedown order was issued on the night of July 23, 2026, by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), under the Ministry of Home Affairs. It directed GitHub to disable three BitChat-related URLs within three hours, citing Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act and Rule 3(1)(d) of the IT Rules, 2021 the same “safe harbour” provisions that require intermediaries to act on government takedown directions. GitHub complied.
BitChat runs on Bluetooth mesh networks, letting devices communicate without mobile data, internet access, or central servers. It saw renewed use in India after authorities cut internet access in parts of central Delhi for two days during the Jantar Mantar protests.
Government’s Rationale
The order flags BitChat’s lack of identity verification, its resistance to lawful interception, its ability to function during shutdowns, potential misuse for coordinating unrest, and the absence of any central entity from which subscriber data could be sought. It also cites IT Act provisions on unauthorized access and abetment, alongside sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on conspiracy and acts against national integration.
Developer’s Response
BitChat was created by Jack Dorsey, former CEO of Twitter/X and Square, who launched it in 2025 as a censorship-resistant, offline communication tool. Responding to the order, Dorsey suggested Indian authorities were uncomfortable with the technology itself and wanted it removed.
Broader Context
The order follows two days of internet shutdowns in central Delhi tied to the protests, alongside reported use of facial recognition by Delhi Police and the geo-blocking of at least one Instagram reel covering the demonstrations. Seen one way, these measures reflect the state’s interest in maintaining order and traceable communication during unrest. Seen another way, the cumulative restrictions raise proportionality concerns and questions about whether tools are being targeted simply because they resist surveillance. Both views are likely to shape the debate ahead.
