Telecommunications Act, 2023 — Overview for Digital Practice

TL;DR for founders

India replaced three colonial-era telecom statutes with the Telecommunications Act, 2023 on 24 December 2023. If you run a network, sell connectivity or possess radio equipment, you need a Union Government authorisation — the old "licence" regime is gone. The Act does not regulate WhatsApp, Signal or other internet-messaging apps; OTT remains under the IT Act, 2000 and MeitY. Spectrum will be auctioned for most commercial use but can be assigned administratively for satellite, government and experimental use. New powers let the Union Government intercept messages, suspend services during a public emergency and declare "critical telecommunication infrastructure". The first tranche of sections commenced on 26 June 2024; sub-rules are rolling out in phases — track the regulatory-calendar.md.

The Telecommunications Act, 2023 (Act 44 of 2023) ('Telecom Act') received Presidential assent on 24 December 2023, replacing the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 and the Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1950. It restructures India's telecommunications regime around an authorisation framework under Section 3, introduces flexible spectrum assignment under Section 4, consolidates interception and public-emergency powers in Sections 20 and 22, mandates user-protection measures in Section 28 and rebrands the Universal Service Obligation Fund as the Digital Bharat Nidhi. The first tranche of sections commenced on 26 June 2024 by Notification S.O. 2408(E) dated 21 June 2024.

What the Act replaces

The Telecom Act repeals the three statutes that governed Indian telecommunications for over a century:

1. The Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 — the foundational statute that defined "telegraph", created the licence regime, conferred interception power under Section 5(2), and was the parent statute for the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules, 2017.
2. The Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 — governed possession of wireless telegraphy apparatus.
3. The Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1950 — a narrow penal statute on unauthorised possession of telegraph wires.

The Telecom Act also amends the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 ('TRAI Act') — in particular, it recalibrates the consultation obligation between the Department of Telecommunications ('DoT') and the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India ('TRAI') on certain matters. The TRAI Act itself is not repealed; TRAI continues to exercise its regulatory and tariff-setting mandate, and appeals continue to lie to the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT).

The Telecom Act preserves the Indian Post Office Act regime by not interfering with it; the Post Office Act, 2023 replaced the Indian Post Office Act, 1898 separately.

Structure of the Act — Chapters I to XI

The Telecom Act is organised into eleven chapters covering preliminary definitions, authorisation, spectrum, standards, right of way, public safety and interception, user protection, innovation and technology development, offences and penalties, adjudication and appeals, and transitional and miscellaneous provisions. Key chapter-level landmarks:

Note: the PIB press release (PRID 2027941) and the arrangement-of-sections page of the gazette PDF should be read together. Section numbering cited in this explainer tracks the India Code consolidated text at indiacode.nic.in.

Scope and definitions — what the Act covers (and what it deliberately does not)

The scope of the Telecom Act turns on two key definitions:

• "Telecommunication" (Section 2(p)) — "transmission, emission or reception of any messages, by wire, radio, optical or other electromagnetic systems, whether or not such messages have been subjected to rearrangement, computation or other processes by any means in the course of their transmission, emission or reception".
• "Telecommunication service" (Section 2(t)) — a service "provided by means of telecommunication".
• "Message" (Section 2(k)) — any sign, signal, writing, text, image, sound, video, data stream, intelligence or information sent through telecommunication.

The definition is wide at the text level, but the policy line on OTT services is clear. On 22 December 2023, the Union Minister for Communications clarified on the floor of the Rajya Sabha that internet-based messaging applications (WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, and similar OTT messaging) are outside the Telecom Act's regulatory scope and remain regulated by MeitY under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 ('IT Rules 2021'). This ministerial statement does not bind future interpretation, but it is the authoritative expression of legislative intent and has been reflected in the DoT's sub-rule drafts so far.

The OTT exclusion is a major policy choice. In the consultation that preceded the Act, the Cellular Operators Association of India and several telcos argued that OTT messaging should be regulated as a telecommunication service because it substitutes SMS and voice. The drafters did not accept that case. Founders building communications features into apps (in-app voice, end-to-end encrypted chat, video conferencing, social DMs) therefore remain under the IT Act / IT Rules 2021 regime — not the Telecom Act — unless and until Parliament amends the definition. Practitioners should monitor any future Telecom Act amendment bill for a redrawing of Section 2(t).

Authorisation regime — the death of the licence

Section 3 of the Telecom Act replaces the colonial licence regime with an authorisation regime:

• Section 3(1) — no person shall (a) establish, operate, maintain or expand a telecommunications network; (b) provide a telecommunications service; or (c) possess radio equipment, except under and in accordance with an authorisation granted by the Union Government.
• Section 3(3) — the Union Government may prescribe different categories of authorisation, different terms, fees and conditions, and may exempt specified classes of persons or equipment from the authorisation requirement by notification.
• Section 3(5) — the Union Government may provide for the surrender, suspension, revocation or variation of authorisations.

In practical terms the authorisation regime is expected to consolidate the existing Unified Licence, Unified Access Service Licence, NLD, ILD, ISP, VNO, VSAT, GMPCS and other licence categories into a single statutory framework with differentiated sub-categories set out in rules. Existing licensees are migrated through transitional provisions in Chapter XI; the migration mechanics are being settled by DoT sub-rules. Until a category is notified, licensees continue under their existing licence terms subject to the transitional savings.

The authorisation framework is the single most important change for digital practice. It converts telecom market access from a contractual / administrative licence instrument into a statutory entitlement which must be read alongside the conditions the Union Government prescribes. Counsel should expect judicial review of authorisation conditions to tighten: Article 14 arbitrariness challenges and Article 19(1)(g) proportionality challenges (after Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, (2020) 3 SCC 637) become more readily available because the instrument is now a "rule of law" instrument with a clearer legal base.

Spectrum — administrative and auction routes

Section 4 of the Telecom Act provides that spectrum shall be assigned by the Union Government, and it codifies the auction-first default with enumerated administrative exceptions:

• Section 4(4) — spectrum shall be assigned by auction, except in the cases set out in the First Schedule to the Act, which may be assigned administratively. The First Schedule lists entries covering, among others, national security and defence, disaster management, transport services (including railways), public broadcasting, satellite-based services (including GMPCS), and specified scientific and research purposes.
• Section 4(5) and (6) — the Union Government may permit spectrum sharing, trading, leasing and surrender subject to prescribed conditions. This liberalises secondary-market spectrum for the first time in Indian law.
• Section 4(7) — the Union Government may permit re-farming and re-purposing of spectrum already assigned, subject to fair treatment of existing assignees.

The administrative-assignment route for satellite services has attracted the most attention. It avoids the auction-versus-administrative debate that delayed earlier 2G and 3G allocations and creates a clearer path for non-geostationary satellite service providers (for example, low-earth-orbit satellite broadband operators). The Supreme Court's decision in Centre for PIL v. Union of India, (2012) 3 SCC 1 ('2G Spectrum Case'), required auction as the constitutional default for scarce natural resources; Section 4(4) operates on the basis that the Act itself constitutes Parliament's considered choice to identify enumerated exceptions, which should survive 2G-Case scrutiny.

Right of way — a statutory regime for digital infrastructure

Chapter IV of the Act (Sections 10 to 18) creates a statutory right-of-way regime for telecommunications infrastructure. Authorised entities may seek permission from public-entity controllers (municipal, state and Union) to install telecom infrastructure on public property; disputes are subject to a prescribed adjudication mechanism. The Telecommunications (Right of Way) Rules, 2024 were notified in May 2024 operationalising this framework and prescribing application forms, timelines (typical 60-day outer limit for public-entity decisions), restoration standards and deemed-approval consequences on non-response.

Previously, right-of-way was governed by a patchwork of state rules and municipal bye-laws, with significant inconsistency across jurisdictions. The 2024 Rules create a more uniform process — though practitioners should continue to check state-specific amendments and fee schedules.

Standards and testing

Section 19 of the Telecom Act empowers the Union Government to prescribe standards, conformity assessment procedures, and mandatory testing for telecom equipment and networks. The Mandatory Testing and Certification of Telecommunication Equipment ('MTCTE') regime previously run under section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 is preserved and re-anchored under Section 19 of the Telecom Act.

Security and interception — Sections 20, 22 and 24

Sections 20, 22 and 24 together replace the Section 5(2) Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 regime that the Supreme Court analysed in PUCL v. Union of India, (1997) 1 SCC 301 and Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India, (2020) 3 SCC 637.

• Section 20 — Interception, disclosure and suspension of messages. The Union Government or a State Government (where authorised by the Union) may, on the occurrence of any public emergency or in the interest of public safety, direct that any message or class of messages to or from any person or class of persons, relating to any particular subject, be intercepted, detained, disclosed in intelligible form, or suspended. The grounds tracked are those recognised as reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) of the Constitution — sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, and preventing incitement to an offence. The Telecommunications (Procedures and Safeguards for Lawful Interception of Messages) Rules, 2024 (notified on 6 December 2024) prescribe the competent authority, the hearing, the review committee and the record-keeping requirements — broadly tracking the PUCL safeguards and codifying the Anuradha Bhasin proportionality requirement.
• Section 22 — Measures for cybersecurity of telecommunication networks and services. Empowers the Union Government to prescribe standards, security practices, upgradation requirements and procedures to ensure cybersecurity. Section 22(2) permits the Union Government, by notification, to declare any network (or part of it) as Critical Telecommunication Infrastructure ('CTI'), and to mandate specific standards, reporting and resilience measures. This parallels the National Critical Information Infrastructure Protection Centre (NCIIPC) regime under Section 70 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, but is a telecom-specific overlay.
• Section 24 — Suspension of telecommunication services on occurrence of any public emergency. The Union or a State Government may suspend telecommunication services in a specified area or with respect to a specified class of services when required in the interests of the grounds stated in Section 20. Section 24 read with its sub-rules is the successor to the Temporary Suspension of Telecom Services (Public Emergency or Public Safety) Rules, 2017 (made under Section 5(2) of the now-repealed Indian Telegraph Act, 1885). The Anuradha Bhasin proportionality, publication and periodic-review requirements continue to apply — the Supreme Court's directions in that judgment attach to the power itself, not to the enabling statute, and therefore transfer to Section 24 by operation of law. See our dual-article analysis of Anuradha Bhasin for the practitioner-level treatment.

Interaction with Section 69 of the IT Act, 2000. The Telecom Act creates an independent interception regime for messages carried by telecommunications networks; Section 69 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 continues to govern interception of information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource by MeitY order. In practice, both regimes will operate in parallel — a single investigation can invoke Section 20 of the Telecom Act (to intercept calls / SMS at the telco) and Section 69 of the IT Act (to intercept stored data at a computer resource). The two sets of procedural rules and review committees overlap but are not identical; practitioners defending surveillance challenges should plead both regimes.

User protection — Section 28

Section 28 of the Telecom Act makes user protection a statutory obligation, not a regulatory directive. The Union Government may prescribe measures for the protection of users, which may include:

• Prior consent — receipt of specified classes of messages (promotional, commercial) to be conditional on the user's prior consent.
• Do Not Disturb ('DND') register — mandatory establishment of a DND register by operators; compliance to be audited and enforced through penalties.
• Biometric-based identity verification — authorised entities may be required to verify users' identities through biometric or other verifiable means before providing services. This creates a statutory foundation for the Aadhaar-based SIM issuance regime and complements the DPDP Act's identity-verification safeguards.
• Grievance redressal mechanisms — prescribed by rules.

Section 28 interlocks with the DPDP Act's consent architecture (Sections 5-7 of the DPDP Act) and with TRAI's Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preference Regulations, 2018 ('TCCCPR'). Telcos should expect the TCCCPR to be reissued under Section 28 as unified rules.

Digital Bharat Nidhi — the successor to USOF

Sections 24-26 (in the rules numbering, and the corresponding sections in the Act) establish the Digital Bharat Nidhi ('DBN') in place of the earlier Universal Service Obligation Fund ('USOF') created under Section 9B of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885. The DBN corpus is funded from Union receipts and from authorisation fees; it is deployable not only for last-mile connectivity in underserved areas (the classic USOF mandate) but also — for the first time — for research and development, pilot projects and testbeds for emerging telecommunications technologies. This is a material expansion; startups and research institutions working on 6G research, satellite-terrestrial integration, and underserved-area connectivity should track DBN scheme notifications.

Offences, penalties, adjudication and appeals

Chapter VIII of the Telecom Act restructures the penal architecture:

• Section 42 — offences include providing telecommunication services without authorisation (three years' imprisonment or a fine up to ₹50 lakh, or both, under Section 42(3)), unauthorised interception, breach of terms of authorisation, and damage to telecommunications infrastructure. A graded penalty structure distinguishes minor breaches from grave offences.
• Section 43 — civil penalties for specified contraventions (up to ₹5 crore for certain categories).
• Section 44 — supply of information to authorised officers; breach carries a lesser penalty.
• Adjudication — Union Government-appointed Adjudicating Officers (not below the rank of Joint Secretary) hear contraventions in the first instance and impose civil penalties; they have the powers of a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
• Appeals — appeals lie to a Designated Appeal Committee (officers not below the rank of Additional Secretary) and onward to the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal ('TDSAT') for specified classes of matters. For criminal offences, the ordinary criminal courts retain jurisdiction.

Sub-rules issued and pending

As of April 2026, the following sub-rules have been issued under the Telecom Act:

Practitioners should track rollout via regulatory-calendar.md and the DoT documents page at dot.gov.in. The sub-rules, not the Act itself, contain most of the operational detail — application procedures, timelines, fees and compliance matrices.

Interaction with DPDP Act 2023 and CERT-In Directions 2022

• DPDP Act, 2023 — telcos are data fiduciaries under Section 2(i) of the DPDP Act. Authorisation-related data processing (KYC, CAF, subscriber verification) must have a lawful processing ground; most processing will rely on "legitimate use" under Section 7(b) of the DPDP Act for the authorisation and for State functions. When Section 20 interception is invoked, the DPDP Act's processing grounds recognise lawful State action (Section 7(c) / Section 17(2) exemptions).
• CERT-In Directions, 28 April 2022 — issued under Section 70B(6) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. These apply to service providers, intermediaries, data centres and body corporates; telcos, as body corporates, must report specified cyber incidents to CERT-In within six hours. The Section 22 cybersecurity regime under the Telecom Act is a second, telecom-specific layer — expect dual reporting obligations once CTI rules are finalised.
• IT Rules 2021 (Intermediary Guidelines) — apply to internet service providers and certain OTT platforms; they coexist with the Telecom Act. Where a telco also provides OTT services (for example, a carrier's own messaging or content app), both regimes apply to the respective functions.

Practitioner implications (100% original Veritect analysis)

For telcos transitioning from licence to authorisation. The transition is not a paper exercise. Existing licence conditions will migrate into authorisation terms, but several conditions (roll-out obligations, spectrum usage charge formula, performance-bank guarantees) are being rewritten under sub-rules. Telcos should (a) conduct a clause-by-clause mapping of their existing licence to the draft authorisation framework; (b) pre-prepare representations for consultation rounds where a clause is materially more onerous; and (c) build in contractual language in B2B contracts (interconnect, MVNO, infrastructure-sharing) that references the authorisation framework rather than the licence regime.

For OTT players watching for scope creep. The current policy line excludes OTT messaging from the Telecom Act. But the statutory definition of "telecommunication service" is wide enough that a rule-based clarification could attempt expansion. Founders building OTT features should (a) document the text-based interpretation relying on the 22 December 2023 ministerial statement; (b) maintain a separate compliance track under the IT Act, 2000 and IT Rules 2021 (Rule 3(1)(d) government-takedown obligations, Rule 3(2) grievance officers, the October 2025 amendment, and the February 2026 synthetic media amendment); and (c) track Bills that touch on "digital communication services" — the pending Digital India Act consultation paper is a key space to watch.

For startups building communications features in apps. A startup that embeds voice / video / SMS into an app via a CPaaS provider (for example, Exotel, Plivo, Twilio) does not itself require a telecom authorisation — the CPaaS provider does. However, KYC obligations for commercial SMS, DND compliance under Section 28 and the TCCCPR, and biometric verification where the flow touches SIM / eSIM provisioning, do flow to the startup. Review your CPaaS contracts for pass-through compliance language and indemnities.

For foreign satellite operators. Section 4 and the First Schedule resolve the auction-versus-administrative debate for satellite spectrum in favour of administrative assignment. Operators should proceed with the authorisation application, track the DBN / CTI sub-rules, and front-load Indian data-processing compliance (DPDP Act) and CERT-In reporting — particularly for user-plane traffic terminating in India.

For data-protection counsel. Prepare a dual-regime compliance note for any client whose operations touch a telecommunications network: (i) DPDP Act duties (consent, purpose limitation, breach reporting under Section 8(6) DPDP Act and DPDP Rules 2025 Rule 6); (ii) Telecom Act duties (authorisation terms, Section 22 cyber measures, Section 28 user-protection). Where there is a conflict, Section 38 of the DPDP Act on overriding effect will interact with Section 57 of the Telecom Act (TRAI Act amendments) — likely resolved by the specific-over-general canon in favour of the Telecom Act for telecom-specific issues.

For constitutional litigation. The Anuradha Bhasin proportionality test continues to constrain Section 24 suspension orders. Every internet shutdown order issued under Section 24 is reviewable under Article 226 of the Constitution; counsel should plead (i) absence of reasons on the face of the order; (ii) failure to publish the order; (iii) disproportionate scope (geographic or temporal); and (iv) failure to convene the review committee within the statutory timeline under the sub-rules. The Kerala HC's Faheema Shirin v. State of Kerala, 2019 SCC OnLine Ker 2976 ratio on the right to access the internet under Article 21 also continues to apply.

Founder checklist

• If you run or build a telecom network / service — identify your authorisation category under the Section 3 framework; don't assume your existing licence automatically maps one-to-one.
• If you handle subscriber data — integrate DPDP Act, 2023 consent and breach-reporting workflows with Section 22 cybersecurity and Section 28 user-protection obligations; build a single compliance register.
• If you send commercial SMS / voice — audit DND compliance under Section 28; document opt-in consent; budget for stiffer penalties under Section 42-43.
• If you operate satellite services — file for administrative spectrum assignment under Section 4 read with the First Schedule; do not wait for a spectrum auction.
• If you run or invest in an OTT messaging / voice product — maintain a documented legal-opinion file on the OTT exclusion; track any Digital India Act proposal that redefines "telecommunication service".

Frequently asked questions

Does the Telecommunications Act, 2023 regulate WhatsApp, Signal and other OTT messaging apps?

No. The definition of 'telecommunication service' in Section 2(t) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023 covers 'transmission, emission or reception' by wire, radio, optical or other electromagnetic systems. On 22 December 2023 the Union Minister for Communications clarified on the floor of Parliament that internet-based messaging applications (WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram and similar OTT services) are outside the Act's scope and remain regulated by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. Sub-rules under the Act cannot enlarge this statutory scope.

When do the provisions of the Act come into force?

The Telecommunications Act, 2023 was notified in the Gazette of India (Act No. 44 of 2023) on 24 December 2023. The first tranche — Sections 1, 2, 10 to 30, 42 to 44, 46, 47, 50 to 58, 61 and 62 — was brought into force with effect from 26 June 2024 by Notification S.O. 2408(E) dated 21 June 2024. A second tranche (Sections 6 to 8, 48 and 59(b)) was notified with effect from 5 July 2024. The residual sections, including the spectrum auction framework and most offences, await further notifications and sub-rules.

How does the Act interact with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023?

The Telecommunications Act, 2023 and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 ('DPDP Act') operate in parallel. Telecommunication service providers and authorised entities process subscriber personal data — KYC, billing, location, call records — and are 'data fiduciaries' under Section 2(i) of the DPDP Act. Once DPDP Rules 2025 (G.S.R. 846(E), 13 November 2025) fully kick in, telcos must comply with both the Act's Section 28 user-protection obligations and the DPDP Act's consent, purpose-limitation and breach-reporting duties. Where Section 20 interception or Section 22 public-emergency powers are invoked, the DPDP Act's processing grounds recognise lawful State action but do not displace the Act's own procedural safeguards.

Does the Act apply to foreign telecommunications operators?

Yes, where they establish or operate a telecommunications network in India, provide a telecommunications service in India, or possess radio equipment in India. Section 3(1) makes authorisation mandatory for any such activity regardless of the entity's place of incorporation. Satellite communications operators (including foreign non-geostationary satellite service providers) that transmit to or from Indian territory fall within the authorisation regime; administrative spectrum assignment under Entry 6 of the First Schedule applies to global mobile personal communications by satellite ('GMPCS') services.

When will the sub-rules on right of way, authorisation categories and interception safeguards be issued?

The Department of Telecommunications is issuing sub-rules in phases. The Telecommunications (Right of Way) Rules, 2024 were notified in May 2024. The Telecommunications (Procedures and Safeguards for Lawful Interception of Messages) Rules, 2024 were notified on 6 December 2024 under Section 20 of the Telecommunications Act, 2023. Draft rules on authorisation categories, critical telecommunication infrastructure and Digital Bharat Nidhi administration remain under consultation. Veritect tracks the full sub-rule rollout in the regulatory-calendar.md companion file; practitioners should verify the current position against egazette.gov.in before advising on any ongoing transition.

Source attribution

Primary sources: The Telecommunications Act, 2023 (Act 44 of 2023) — India Code; Gazette of India eGazette (Act 44 of 2023, 24 December 2023); Department of Telecommunications — Telecommunications Act 2023 landing page; PIB — The Telecommunications Act 2023: Ushering in a New Era of Connectivity (PRID 2027941); and PIB — Ushering in a New Era of Connectivity (PRID 2031057). This explainer is provided for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. The sub-rules under the Act continue to be issued in phases; practitioners should verify current sub-rule text against egazette.gov.in before advising on any specific transaction.