Skip to Content

Is India Ready for an AI Regulatory Framework?

You're stuck in Bangalore traffic again, watching your cab driver follow some AI-powered route that's supposed to be "optimized" but has you going in circles around Koramangala. Your phone keeps buzzing with perfectly curated news updates, your UPI payment just got instant approval for that overpriced coffee, and somewhere in the digital universe, algorithms are quietly deciding everything from your loan eligibility to what you'll binge-watch tonight.

Welcome to 2025, where AI isn't just knocking on our door, it's already moved in, made itself comfortable, and is now rearranging the furniture.

But here's the million-dollar question: Are we actually ready to handle this technological tsunami with proper rules and regulations? As someone who's been tracking this space closely, I can tell you it's complicated. We're not starting from scratch, but we're far from the finish line.

The Foundation We've Built So Far

Let's start with what we've got in our regulatory toolkit. The Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act of 2023 was our big moment. Finally, a comprehensive data privacy law that actually has some teeth. Think of it as the bouncer at the nightclub of personal data. It's strict about consent, which is brilliant for users but creates interesting challenges for AI companies that need massive datasets to train their models.

Here's where it gets tricky: The DPDP Act is a solid front-door lock, but AI seeps in through windows, chimneys, and back doors. Issues like algorithmic bias, deepfakes, and automated decision-making? The Act touches on these indirectly, but it's not exactly built for the AI age.

Meanwhile, NITI Aayog has been our policy cheerleader since 2018 with their National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence. They've been talking about AI in healthcare, agriculture, and education. All the sectors where India could really shine. The recent ₹2,000 crore boost for the India AI Mission shows the government is putting money where its mouth is, which is always a good sign.

But we're still operating without a dedicated AI law. It's like trying to regulate cricket with football rules. You can make it work, but it's not ideal.

Learning from the Global Classroom

Let's take a quick world tour to see how others are handling this challenge:

The EU Approach: The Strict Teacher The Europeans went all-in with their AI Act—it's comprehensive, risk-based, and comes with fines that can make even tech giants take notice (up to 6% of global turnover). They've banned social scoring systems outright and put heavy regulations on high-risk AI applications like facial recognition.

For India, this model has appeal—we could adapt their risk categorization system. Low-risk for chatbots, high-risk for anything that might influence elections or perpetuate social biases. But would such strict regulations stifle our startup ecosystem? That's the trade-off we need to consider.

The US Way: The Laissez-Faire Approach America's playing it cool with voluntary guidelines and industry self-regulation. Their 2023 Executive Order on AI focuses on safety testing and equity, but it's more "pretty please" than "you must." This approach suits their innovation-heavy culture, and frankly, it's closer to what NASSCOM has been advocating for India.

China's Method: The State-Controlled Route China's approach is both impressive and authoritarian—they've got over 100 AI regulations since 2017, all designed to ensure AI aligns with "socialist values." They're particularly strict about content generation and heavily invest in surveillance AI.

India's democratic, diverse nature means we can't (and shouldn't) copy China's model wholesale, but their speed of implementation? That's something we could learn from.

Where We Stand Today

Let's be honest about our current situation. On paper, we're making progress. The AI Competency Framework for public servants launched in 2025 shows we're serious about building institutional knowledge. NASSCOM's Responsible AI Resource Kit is helping businesses navigate ethical AI development.

The challenge isn't just regulatory—it's cultural and practical. In a country where AI could automate 45 million jobs by 2030 (per NASSCOM estimates), we need frameworks that protect workers while encouraging innovation. We need rules that work for a startup in Bangalore just as well as they do for a multinational in Gurgaon.

One Size Doesn't Fit All

Here's what makes India unique in the global AI conversation: our incredible diversity. We're not just talking about 1.4 billion people but we're talking about 22 official languages, countless dialects, different socioeconomic backgrounds, and varying levels of digital literacy.

Any AI regulation we create needs to account for this reality. An algorithm that works perfectly for urban, English-speaking users might completely fail or worse, discriminate against rural, regional language speakers. We've already seen cases where AI hiring tools show bias against certain names or backgrounds. In India's context, this could exacerbate existing social divides.

This is where initiatives like Sarvam AI's Hindi-language models become crucial. They're not just building technology; they're building inclusive technology that reflects India's linguistic diversity.

We're Getting There, But We Need to Accelerate

Based on everything I've observed and researched, here's my honest assessment: India isn't fully ready for a comprehensive AI regulatory framework yet, but we're closer than many realize.

Our strength lies in our Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI)—systems like Aadhaar, UPI, and the JAM trinity provide a solid foundation for AI integration. We've got the technical capability, the policy intent, and increasingly, the political will.

What we lack is speed and specificity. While the EU was drafting comprehensive AI laws, we were still figuring out data protection. While China was implementing dozens of AI regulations, we were issuing advisories.

But here's the thing, maybe that's not entirely bad. Rushing into regulation without understanding the implications could stifle innovation. The key is finding the sweet spot between protection and progress.

The Risk of Over-Regulation

Before we get too eager about comprehensive AI laws, let's consider the flip side. What happens if we over-regulate too soon?

Look at what happened with drone regulations in India, initially, the rules were so restrictive that they practically killed the commercial drone industry before it could take off. It took years of policy reversals and simplified procedures to revive the sector.

Over-regulating AI could create similar problems. Rigid compliance requirements might favour large corporations that can afford compliance teams, while crushing startups that drive innovation. Bureaucratic delays in sandbox approvals could mean Indian AI companies lose competitive advantage to international players. Most importantly, inflexible standards might not adapt quickly enough to AI's rapid evolution, leaving us with outdated rules governing cutting-edge technology.

The challenge is regulatory agility—creating frameworks that are robust enough to protect citizens but flexible enough to evolve with the technology.

A Uniquely Indian Solution

If I were designing India's AI regulatory framework, here's what I'd focus on:

Data Sovereignty First: Build on the DPDP Act to mandate local data storage for sensitive AI applications. We can't have our data training foreign models that might not align with Indian values or interests.

Ethical AI for Diversity: Create guidelines that specifically address bias in the Indian context. This means testing AI systems across different languages, regions, and socioeconomic groups before deployment.

Innovation-Friendly Compliance: Adopt a risk-based approach like the EU, but with regulatory sandboxes for startups. Let innovation flourish while maintaining oversight.

Sector-Specific Rules: Healthcare AI should have different regulations than fintech AI. One-size-fits-all doesn't work in a country as diverse as ours.

Built-in Agility: Create frameworks that can evolve with technology, not rigid rules that become obsolete in two years.

The Bottom Line

India isn't fully ready for an AI regulatory regime but the building blocks are in place. What we need now is urgency with wisdom: to act swiftly, but not blindly. The foundation is there, the awareness is growing, and the political will is emerging.

What we need now is urgency without panic, regulation without stifling innovation, and above all, a uniquely Indian approach that reflects our values, diversity, and aspirations.

The next few years will be crucial. Get it right, and India could become a global leader in responsible AI. Get it wrong, and we might find ourselves playing catch-up in a technology that's already reshaping the world.


References