India Tightens AI Governance Amid Rising Risks
India Considers Stricter AI Governance Amid Rising Risks
Key Highlights
India intensifies AI regulation due to cybersecurity, deepfakes, and infrastructure threats. New guidelines shift from ‘light-touch’ approach. Learn more.
The Indian government is intensifying its regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) as rapid technological advancements raise concerns about cybersecurity, deepfakes, and risks to essential sectors.
According to a Mint report, the Technology and Policy Expert Committee (TPEC), a six-member body formed on April 13, is developing new guidelines that may shift India away from its current “light-touch” AI governance approach.
Additionally, the 10-member inter-ministerial AI Governance and Economic Group (AIGEG), also established on the same day, will serve as India’s primary institutional mechanism for AI governance policy development and coordination.
The establishment of the AIGEG formalizes institutional recommendations from India’s AI governance guidelines and the Economic Survey, and is expected to influence the country’s future AI policy direction.
The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) stated that the TPEC will act as a standing expert advisory body, offering specialized technical, policy, and strategic expertise to support the AIGEG. It will provide expert input on policy design, regulatory measures, and India’s involvement in AI governance at international forums.
The AIGEG will spearhead India’s overall AI policy direction and coordinate efforts across various ministries, while the TPEC will offer expert advice and translate technical and policy issues into practical recommendations.
The committee is headed by MeitY secretary S Krishnan and includes experts from IIT Madras, IIT Gandhinagar, Nasscom, the Data Security Council of India (DSCI), and the Manufacturers’ Association for Information Technology (MAIT). The AIGEG, which oversees the framework, is chaired by IT minister Ashwini Vaishnaw.
If implemented, this move could signal a shift from India’s previous AI policy, where the government avoided a dedicated AI law, relying instead on the IT Act and IT Rules to address issues like deepfakes and harmful AI-generated content.
Two senior officials told Mint that the recommendations from the TPEC and AIGEG are likely to differ significantly from the AI governance guidelines previously issued by the Principal Scientific Adviser’s (PSA) committee.
The earlier framework under the IndiaAI Mission adopted a “light-touch” approach, promoting flexible, innovation-led regulation by using existing laws such as the IT Act and sector-specific rules, rather than introducing a specific AI law.
The officials noted that recent controversies involving explicit AI-generated content on xAI’s Grok chatbot and the launch of advanced AI models like Anthropic’s Claude Mythos have heightened concerns about risks to sectors such as banking, power, and digital infrastructure, according to the report.
This regulatory push also follows increased scrutiny of AI-generated content on digital platforms. In January, MeitY directed X to remove obscene and unlawful imagery generated by Grok and requested a detailed compliance report on takedowns and user-level actions.
To enhance oversight, the government amended the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, bringing AI-generated content under regulatory control. The updated rules, effective February 20, 2026, define “synthetically generated information” and require platforms to clearly label such content.
Furthermore, the Centre has proposed amendments to Section 87 of the IT Act to enforce stricter compliance timelines for intermediaries like Google, Meta, and X. Platforms may be required to remove content that could facilitate unlawful acts within three hours of receiving government directions.
Separately, the Gujarat High Court issued notices to Meta, Google, X, Reddit, and Scribd in response to a Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a stronger regulatory framework to curb the spread of deepfake content hosted on these platforms.
The central government also noted X’s lack of responsiveness, stating that out of 94 intimations issued between 2024 and 2026, the platform submitted formal responses in only 13 cases. The next hearing in the matter is scheduled for May 8.
