DoT advocates for light-touch AI regulations with risk-based approach
The Department of Telecommunication is pushing for a regulatory framework that emphasizes accountability over transparency. This approach contrasts with MeitY’s 2024 plans for mandatory AI testing. The focus is on ensuring quality of service and minimizing regulatory burden.

The Department of Telecommunication (DoT) is advocating for a light-touch regulatory approach to AI, emphasizing a risk-based framework that prioritizes accountability and quality of service over stringent transparency requirements. This stance is supported by industry stakeholders, including Ambika Khurana, Chief Regulatory & Corporate Affairs Officer at Vodafone Idea, who highlighted the need for a progressive and enabling regulatory system that fosters innovation while ensuring service excellence.
The push for a risk-based approach comes amid differing regulatory strategies between DoT and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY). While MeitY had proposed mandatory pre-deployment AI testing in 2024, DoT is instead focusing on creating a regulatory environment that encourages innovation without imposing excessive compliance burdens. This includes forming working groups to develop AI standards and guidelines tailored to the telecom sector.
A key number associated with this regulatory shift is 223, which refers to the advisory issued by MeitY in 2024 that mandated AI models for government approval. In contrast, DoT has been working on a more flexible framework, as evidenced by the formation of a working group in June 2026. This indicates a broader industry and regulatory effort to balance innovation with oversight, ensuring that AI deployment in telecom services remains both secure and efficient.
In India, the regulatory push by DoT has significant implications for telecom operators and AI developers. The risk-based approach may reduce compliance costs for companies, but it also raises concerns about oversight and potential risks in AI deployment. Indian regulators, including MeitY, have expressed a need for a sovereign understanding of AI systems before deployment, which may lead to ongoing regulatory tensions between different government bodies.
The regulatory landscape for AI in India remains in flux, with DoT’s light-touch approach potentially clashing with MeitY’s more stringent requirements. While the industry welcomes a less burdensome framework, the lack of a unified regulatory strategy may create challenges in implementation and governance. The outcome of these competing approaches will likely shape the future of AI deployment in India’s telecom sector.