Published Feb 10, 2026 | 7:04 PM ⚊ Updated Feb 10, 2026 | 7:04 PM
Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy (Right) and Chandrababu Naidu share a warm relationship, unusual in the two Telugu states.
Synopsis: The letter to X has raised suspicion over whether the police were acting on a formal complaint or at the behest of political leaders in Hyderabad.
Several eyebrows have been raised in the two Telugu states after the Telangana cyber police wrote a letter to social media platform X (formerly Twitter), seeking the details of a handle that posted abusive and spiteful content about Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu.
Questions have been raised over whether the Cybercrime Police Station in Hyderabad wrote to X based on a formal complaint or at the behest of political leaders in the state.
Cybercrime Police Inspector’s 26 January letter cited violations of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including Section 353(2) related to statements promoting enmity or ill-will.
The official notice to X Corp’s Safety-Legal Policy team in the US, described the content as “abusive and hateful,” intended to “provoke, spread hatred, disturb public order, and harm the dignity of a constitutional functionary”.
It demanded a range of data: the registered user’s name, username, email, phone number, account creation details, IP login history with timestamps, device information, and any other relevant data to identify the offender.
The police invoked Section 3(7) of the IT (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011, warning that non-compliance could invite legal action under Indian law. The letter included a declaration that the case was “not political, military, racial or religious” in nature, and framed it as a lawful investigation.
The case grabbed attention for one glaring reason: the target is not a Telangana leader, but the chief minister of neighbouring Andhra Pradesh.
The letter claimed that the posts disturbed public order, but the constitutional functionary in question has been holding office in Amaravati, not Hyderabad.
Cybercrime units often handle cross border or interstate cases, especially while tracing the accused to their jurisdiction or the content has wider ripple effects in Telugu-speaking regions.
However, allocating investigative bandwidth to protect a leader from another state has defied reasoning. The user in question appeared to have targeted Naidu specifically, using derogatory language that the police deemed violative of laws against promoting hatred or harming dignity.
The letter referenced “continuously pushing content intended to abuse, provoke, and spread hatred.”
Sources suspected whether this was an isolated request; indications pointed to the Cybercrime police station pursuing details on multiple similar instances, hinting at a crackdown on anti-Naidu trolls originating from, or visible, in Telangana.
The timing and context fuelled suspicions of political influence. Telangana Chief Minister A Revanth Reddy and Naidu share a warm relationship, unusual in the often-adversarial politics of the two Telugu states.
Reddy, who began his political career in the Telugu Desam Party (TDP) under Naidu’s mentorship, has maintained respectful ties even after switching to Congress. The two leaders have held multiple meetings to resolve long-pending bifurcation issues, water disputes, and interstate cooperation — often described in media as reflecting a mentor-protege bond or pragmatic friendship.
The police’s letter has sparked a pertinent question: whether Telangana Cybercrime unit has acted acting independently on a citizen’s complaint, or responded to subtle cues from the political leadership in Hyderabad?
The letter’s emphasis on “harming the dignity of a constitutional functionary” — when that functionary is from a neighbouring government — lends credence to the view that this serves as a gesture of goodwill.
Additionally, it has triggered the question of free speech.
Dileep Konatham, Digital Media Director under the previous BRS government, said it was surprising that the police had sought extensive details from X over content posted by an individual.
“Writing to X itself is a very serious matter. The minute details sought by the police show that they have not shed their habit of attempting to muzzle free speech,” he said.
Konatham pointed out that both the High Court and the Supreme Court have ruled that dissent expressed through social media posts does not constitute a criminal offence.
“Despite these clear judicial pronouncements, the police are resorting to such actions,” he remarked.
Konatham alleged that the police appeared to be acting under the directions of the political leadership. “It is a known fact that the police behave as though the Telangana chief minister is subordinate to the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu,” he claimed.
The Telangana police, he said, have a poor track record in protecting free speech.
“What is most surprising is the mention of Chandrababu Naidu’s name in the official letter to X. They have referred to him simply as ‘Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu’ without even mentioning that he is the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh,” Konatham said.
He questioned the Telangana police for going out of their way to act on behalf of a chief minister of a neighbouring state.
“They have no jurisdiction in Andhra Pradesh. It is even more shocking that the police acted suo motu when no complaint was lodged,” he added.
(Edited by Majnu Babu).
