- One thing is clear: India’s regulatory framework for digital platforms is no longer a passive set of guidelines — it is being actively and aggressively enforced.
Meta-owned WhatsApp has formally submitted its response to the Indian government’s notice regarding its proposed “username” feature, with the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) now examining the reply, sources confirmed on Thursday.
The submission marks the latest development in an escalating regulatory tussle between Big Tech platforms and the Indian government over user safety and platform accountability.
A feature under the microscope
The username feature, which would allow WhatsApp users to communicate without sharing their phone numbers, was flagged by the Centre as a potential enabler of cybercrime. In its notice issued on July 1, 2026, MeitY raised concerns that the feature could materially increase incidents of online fraud, phishing, digital-arrest scams, and impersonation attacks.
The government directed Meta not to launch the feature until consultations were completed “to the satisfaction of the government,” effectively putting the rollout on hold in India — WhatsApp’s largest market with over 500 million users.
WhatsApp subsequently requested additional time to prepare its response and assured the government that it would not proceed with the feature in India until all discussions were concluded. The company was granted an extension, with its reply due by July 9.
Speaking earlier on Thursday at the CII GCC Business Summit, IT Secretary S. Krishnan confirmed that WhatsApp’s reply had been due that day. Sources later indicated that the response has indeed been received and is now under examination.
WhatsApp’s defence
WhatsApp has maintained that the username feature is not yet live and will be rolled out gradually later this year. In its public statements and likely in its submission to the government, the company has outlined multiple layers of defence against potential misuse.
A WhatsApp spokesperson previously detailed several protective measures. The platform is holding the highest-profile usernames — including those of public figures, government entities, celebrities, and verified Meta accounts — so they can only be claimed by their legitimate owners. Lookalike derivatives of known names are also being held to prevent impersonation.
The company has also emphasised that users will still require a phone number to sign up for WhatsApp, anchoring the platform to verified identities. Additional safeguards include limits on how many new people an account can contact, blocks on repeated attempts to guess someone’s username, and automated systems designed to detect and remove activity exhibiting common impersonation and abuse patterns.
When the feature does become available, WhatsApp says it will display contextual information before users respond to first-time senders — including whether the sender is a new account, a saved contact, a mutual group member, or based in a different country. The idea is to help users make informed decisions about whom they engage with.
Telegram and Signal under scrutiny
The Centre’s concerns over username-based communication extend beyond WhatsApp. A day after issuing the notice to Meta, MeitY also sent formal notices to Telegram and Signal, both of which already offer username-based messaging. The notices questioned how these platforms are addressing fraud and impersonation risks tied to their existing features.
IT Secretary Krishnan noted on Thursday that replies from Telegram and Signal have not yet been received. “There is still a little more time, so the replies have not yet been received…. We will examine this issue,” he said.
The move signals a broader regulatory posture. Unlike WhatsApp, where the username feature is yet to launch, Telegram and Signal have operated with username-based communication for some time, placing them under a different category of scrutiny — the government is effectively asking them to justify features already in use.
While WhatsApp dominates India’s messaging landscape with 500 million users, Telegram’s user base is a fraction of that. Nevertheless, the platform has been under increasing regulatory pressure on multiple fronts.
Regulatory offensive against Meta
The username notice is far from the only challenge Meta is facing in India. Over the weekend, the government issued a stern notice to the company over the presence of Child Sexual Exploitative and Abuse Material (CSEAM) in paid Instagram advertisements.
The notice followed a BBC Eye investigation that revealed Instagram was running ads promoting such material, with some using explicit terms and linking to content hosted on Telegram.
The government ordered Meta to immediately disable the offending ads and demanded an explanation within seven days. Meta has stated that it is in touch with Indian authorities regarding the reports .
Separately, Telegram was served a notice directing it to crack down on what the government described as the “widespread dissemination” of pirated films, OTT content, and other audio-visual material through its platform. The dual notices — one on child safety and one on piracy — underscore an increasingly assertive regulatory stance by Indian authorities.
In its notice to WhatsApp, the government explicitly reminded Meta that as a significant social-media intermediary, it is bound by due-diligence obligations under the Information Technology Act and its associated rules. The notice asked the company to explain why action should not be initiated under these provisions over a feature that “may increase incidents of cybercrime.”
This framing is significant. It signals that MeitY views the username feature not merely as a product design choice but as a potential compliance failure under existing Indian law. By linking the feature to foreseeable harm, the government is setting a precedent that could affect how platforms approach feature rollouts in India going forward.
