The Approach to Regulating AI in India: A Socio-Political and Strategic Analysis
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a defining technology of the twenty-first century, influencing not only economic productivity but also societal structures and political governance. Countries across the world are now grappling with the challenge of regulating a technology that is evolving rapidly and permeating diverse domains such as healthcare, education, governance, law enforcement, and financial systems. While many nations have chosen to institutionalize their vision through legislation or national strategy documents, India’s approach remains more exploratory and decentralized. This essay analyses India’s approach to AI governance in light of global trends, while highlighting the socio-political dimensions that must be considered in crafting a robust and inclusive regulatory framework.
Global Developments in AI Governance
The global discourse on AI governance has evolved significantly in recent years. Initially anchored in ethical concerns, such as ensuring fairness, accountability, and non-discrimination, the emphasis has gradually shifted towards balancing these ethical principles with innovation and economic growth. Some countries have taken concrete steps by enacting AI-specific legislation. The European Union, for instance, has developed the AI Act, aiming to regulate AI systems based on the risks they pose. China has implemented sector-specific laws targeting particular applications like generative AI and deepfake technologies. Meanwhile, countries like Canada and South Korea have introduced comprehensive governance frameworks and institutional mechanisms to guide AI development.
In contrast, other countries such as the United Kingdom, Japan, Brazil, and Pakistan are still in the process of formulating draft AI legislation or strategy documents. Most nations, however, have published national AI strategies or policy blueprints that lay down broad principles, intentions, budget allocations, and sectoral roadmaps. These strategies reflect a consensus on the need for ethical, inclusive, and sustainable AI ecosystems that also advance national interests in the global technology race.
India’s Unique Approach
India stands out in the global landscape by not having a formal, legally binding framework or an officially endorsed national AI strategy. The 2018 document prepared by the NITI Aayog titled National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence was a significant step in laying down key policy priorities. However, it remains a non-binding advisory document without a corresponding implementation plan, budget, or legislative backing. In practice, India has adopted a mission-driven approach through initiatives such as the IndiaAI mission, which seeks to build a trustworthy and innovation-friendly AI ecosystem across seven thematic pillars.
This approach offers flexibility. It allows India to remain adaptive to the fast-paced evolution of AI technologies and their associated geopolitical and economic implications. Such an approach also encourages experimentation and consultation with a wide range of stakeholders, including private companies, academia, civil society, and international partners. However, the absence of a formal national strategy or legal architecture creates ambiguity. It fails to provide a unified vision or clear accountability mechanisms, and leaves the AI ecosystem vulnerable to fragmented development, inconsistent standards, and uneven access.
Social Implications of AI in India
AI is not merely a technological issue; it intersects deeply with social structures. In a country as diverse and complex as India, the deployment of AI in sensitive domains like healthcare, education, law enforcement, and welfare services must be approached with extreme caution. The risks of algorithmic discrimination, biased data sets, and exclusionary outcomes are particularly severe for marginalized communities. Without appropriate oversight, AI systems could reinforce existing inequalities or create new forms of exclusion.
For instance, automated systems used in welfare delivery or digital public infrastructure could inadvertently deny benefits to eligible individuals due to data errors or algorithmic biases. Facial recognition technologies used in policing have raised concerns about surveillance, privacy violations, and potential misuse. In education, AI-powered tools may widen the digital divide if students from underprivileged backgrounds lack access to compatible devices, connectivity, or language-appropriate content.
India also lacks public awareness around the functioning of AI algorithms, their decision-making criteria, and the metrics used to evaluate their efficacy. This opacity contributes to a limited civic discourse on the ethical use of AI and its societal implications. Democratic deliberation is essential in shaping technologies that affect people’s rights, opportunities, and daily lives. In the absence of transparency and inclusivity, AI risks becoming an elitist technology rather than a transformative public good.
Political Dimensions of AI Governance
AI has strategic importance in national security, diplomacy, and state capacity. In the global race for technological supremacy, nations that control the development and application of AI will hold considerable geopolitical influence. India’s growing investment in AI research and innovation aligns with its ambition to become a global digital power. However, political leadership must also recognize the dual-use nature of AI — its potential to be weaponized or manipulated for misinformation, electoral interference, or mass surveillance.
Political commitment to AI governance must therefore go beyond slogans and pilot projects. It must translate into institutional mechanisms that ensure democratic accountability, legal safeguards, and inter-ministerial coordination. Moreover, as AI systems increasingly intersect with public administration, the government must articulate how data will be collected, processed, and used, and under what safeguards. The absence of clear boundaries opens the door for misuse, either by state institutions or private actors with vested interests.
The political challenge also lies in balancing central authority with state-level innovation. Given India’s federal structure, subnational governments have a significant role to play in deploying AI for service delivery, governance, and regulation. A one-size-fits-all model may not work. The central government’s role should be to lay down ethical guidelines, ensure interoperability standards, and provide funding and training support, while empowering states to experiment and adapt policies to local contexts.
The Role of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act
The Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act of 2023 marks a significant step toward centralizing data regulation in India. Drawing inspiration from global models like the EU’s GDPR and China’s Personal Information Protection Law, it creates a strong foundation for AI governance by establishing norms around data collection, processing, and consent. However, data protection alone is not sufficient. AI-specific concerns such as model transparency, explainability, liability for errors, and sector-specific risk assessments need separate regulatory attention.
India can build on the DPDP framework to develop a hybrid model for AI governance—combining centralized oversight with sectoral norms, and coupling legal regulations with ethical guidelines. An AI policy document could serve as an intermediary step, allowing the government to pilot regulatory tools, build institutional capacity, and initiate public consultations before codifying a law.
Way Forward: Towards a Responsible AI Ecosystem
To advance responsibly in the AI era, India must articulate a clear national vision that integrates innovation with inclusion and ethical governance. A national AI policy should focus on five core areas. First, it should identify priority sectors where AI can drive equitable socio-economic development, such as agriculture, healthcare, and education. Second, it must establish an independent institutional authority to oversee AI regulation, impact assessments, and grievance redressal. Third, it should set guidelines for algorithmic fairness, explainability, and risk mitigation. Fourth, it must prioritize capacity building by investing in AI research, skilling, and infrastructure, especially in underserved regions. Finally, public engagement must be institutionalized through consultations, awareness campaigns, and open data practices.
India’s AI journey is still in its early stages. The country has the potential to become a leader not only in AI innovation but also in demonstrating how democratic societies can govern powerful technologies with transparency, accountability, and empathy. The decisions made today will shape the socio-political landscape of tomorrow. Therefore, India’s AI governance framework must reflect the spirit of its Constitution—committed to justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity—while embracing the possibilities of the future.
