The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) has released the India AI Governance Guidelines on November 5, 2025 which shows how India intends to regulate artificial intelligence. Unlike the European Union's rigid AI Act, India's framework adopts a “hands-off approach” to AI regulation that prioritizes innovation over restrictive compliance. Given the importance of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Business and Society, this GD Topic on India AI Governance Guidelines 2025 is a very important topic for MBA Admissions 2025.
Understanding India's AI Regulatory Framework
The India AI Governance Guidelines is a departure from traditional regulatory models. Rather than imposing a standalone AI law with rigid compliance requirements, the framework leverages existing laws like Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023, and the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 to address AI-related challenges.
This AI regulatory framework is built on the philosophy of "Innovation over Restraint." The approach recognizes India's substantial AI talent pool of more than 4 lakh professionals and the projected economic benefits of more than $500 billion by 2035. By avoiding new statutory laws, India aims to accelerate AI adoption in business and society without unwarranted regulation.
7 Sutras of India's AI Governance
India’s AI regulation is based on 7 sutras.
It should be noted that AI Guidelines are not legally binding legislation. Instead, they function as standards or guidelines that companies must adhere.
Sectoral Oversight: Foundation of India's AI Regulation
A key feature of India's hands-off approach to AI regulation is the dependence on existing sectoral regulators rather than creating a new AI and technology regulation. As per the AI guidelines, government agencies like MeitY work alongside specialized bodies such as the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) to manage sectoral risks.
This regulatory approach means AI companies and developers face dual-layered obligations. While MeitY provides broad philosophical direction through the Seven Sutras, legal compliance mandates come from sector-specific regulators. For example, fintech companies must meet RBI's Cybersecurity and Cyber Resilience Framework requirements while aligning with MeitY's broader guidance.
The AI guideline and framework also requires updating existing laws to address emerging AI risks. An example is the proposed amendment to the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PC-PNDT) Act to prevent misuse of AI technology in analyzing radiology images for unlawful sex selection.
Prof. Ajay Kumar Sood, Principal Scientific Adviser, Government of India Explains AI Guidelines
“The world stands at the cusp of the Artificial Intelligence (AI) revolution. Our commitment is to harness AI for the common good, ensuring its benefits reach the last citizen by revolutionizing diagnostics in rural healthcare, providing personalized education in local languages, or enhancing climate resilience for our farmers. Recognizing both the immense promise and the inherent risks, ranging from the spread of deepfakes, misinformation and algorithmic biases to threats against national security, the India AI Governance Guidelines provides a framework that balances AI innovation with accountability, and progress with safety.”
Self-Regulation and Regulatory Sandboxes
The AI guideline encourages industry-led self-regulation, delegating the task of developing compliance mechanisms to the industry. Major technology players are expected to create codes of conduct and guidelines for self-audits, particularly regarding algorithmic transparency and competition compliance.
Indian AI Guideline Differs from Global Approach
India’s light-touch AI regulatory model stands in clear contrast to the EU’s AI Act, which imposes detailed risk classifications and heavy compliance requirements that many fear could slow innovation and increase costs. By prioritising “Innovation over Restraint,” India aims to attract global investment and retain AI talent. Unlike the United States, which follows a fragmented, sector-specific approach without a federal AI law, India has adopted a unified framework under MeitY, supported by strong Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI). This positions India as a practical template for emerging economies, offering speed, scalability, and a balanced pathway between innovation and regulation.
Conclusion
India's hands-off approach to AI regulation through the India AI Governance Guidelines represents a matured outlook to maximize innovation while ensuring responsible deployment. By leveraging existing laws, empowering sectoral regulators, and building robust digital infrastructure, India achieves regulatory flexibility without the innovation drag of comprehensive legislation.
However, Indian industry will have to make sure that they follow the AI guidelines in letter and spirt to make India a beneficiary of AI boom.
