Ambani, Adani outlets among Indian publishers contesting Modi’s privacy law

Business Recorder · 26/10/2026، 10:26:54 AM

NEW DELHI: A group of 21 news publishers, including companies owned by billionaires Mukesh Ambani and Gautam Adani, has challenged India’s privacy law in court, arguing it would trample investigative work and let New Delhi identify journalists’ sources, documents show. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government last year announced implementation of a privacy law to protect digital personal data of users, raising compliance requirements for platforms like Meta and Google. The publishers have said that since media outlets were not exempt, the law was an invasion of press freedom. Media companies received assurances in an August meeting with the government that the law would protect press freedom, but not having a written carve-out for journalists like in the European Union, Singapore and Britain was alarming, India’s Digital News Publishers Association (DNPA) said in a confidential filing at the Supreme Court, reviewed by Reuters. The October 6 lawsuit, being reported for the first time and due to be heard on Tuesday, is the most high-profile challenge to Modi’s privacy law. Until now, only free speech activists and a group of smaller news outlets had challenged it. It also marks an unusual challenge to the government from businesses headed by Ambani and Adani, who opposition parties allege are close to Modi and get favourable treatment - charges the businesses and the government vehemently deny. DNPA and the media groups did not respond to requests for comment from Reuters, and neither did India’s information technology ministry. The publishers are demanding that most of the law’s contentious provisions, which kick in from May 2027, should be quashed. They are arguing the law could force a journalist to get prior consent from a person they want to investigate and force publishers to erase stories. They also say powers granted by the law to demand information could expose reporters’ sources. The law would “render investigative journalism a benign and neutered recorder