India Needs More Than a Ban. It Needs a Regulator

In April 2026, for the third time in a row I was speaking at the Global Age Assurance Standards Summit and why this has been on the go because I mapped the pattern of progress in India. My first year was about age assurance and digital safety, second year was about parental engagement and consent under DPDP and third year even when children are unprotected, I addressed the urgency that the government needs to take beyond just BAN.

What this blog looks into is the measures that as a country we need to define for our children, their experiences and demands. I see there is a movement to address children’s digital issues as the growing incidences we have seen of harm and abuse.

In February 2026, three sisters in Ghaziabad lost their lives attempting a social media challenge. The country grieved. Politicians responded. Karnataka proposed a social media ban for children under 16. Andhra Pradesh followed. More states are in line.

Highly influential games and content resulted in the loss of three minor sisters. What a shock this must have been for a family and a horror that carries in every house of unregulated digital norms. What we are asking for is safe and positive experiences for children and not just banning the internet from their daily routine.

“The urgency is real. But urgency without architecture produces headlines, not protection.”

India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 is genuinely ambitious; it defines a child as anyone under 18, stricter than the US, broader than Europe, with penalties up to ₹200 crore. The DPDP Rules 2025 are notified. The law exists. What doesn't exist is the institution to make it real.

Over 90% of Indian teenagers are on social media. 71% use a family member's account. Age-gating was built for one device, one child. India's internet is communal.

What we need to think is that every verification system that ignores this shared-device reality will fail before it launches. But the harsh reality we come across hearing about the BAN culture. What the stakeholders in the ecosystem are proposing is better regulation, more awareness that bridges the gap between the generations of technology users.

There is also a cost we rarely name: the gendered cost. In patriarchal households, a government-sanctioned ban on children's digital access becomes justification to confiscate a girl's phone specifically. Framed as protection, it becomes control. And in rural India, where a smartphone may be a first-generation learner's only bridge to education, blanket exclusion isn't safety - it's inequity.

During the conference, I was asked a few questions around it by the global practitioners which also reflects the international interests in age assurance in India.

• How are Indian companies adhering to the age assurance mechanisms and what are the parental engagements to address age assurance.
• Are there any programs or youth initiatives led by the govt or other partners to engage on policies and age assurance

One of the participants also made a comment that ‘age assurance should be used to deploy age appropriate and safe digital spaces for children - and not to ban and exclude them from the digital environment.’

This makes it even more evident to think about the age assurance systems in India. Do we need one?

Closely studying the DPDP Act, what is clearly visible is that it mandates verifiable parental consent but doesn't define what verification means. It gives children rights but no mechanism to exercise them independently. It says nothing about generative AI, where children are now turning for advice, companionship, and emotional support. The same regulatory vacuum that preceded social media harms is forming around AI right now.

We have regulators for money (SEBI), telecom (TRAI), and competition (CCI). It is time to build one for children (this is one of the proposed recommendations too!).

At Social & Media Matters we believe that, if we have better regulation systems, we will be able to safeguard our children from online harm. We need more awareness about threats and harms that children encounter, parental/ educator open conversations, a system where we have our roles and responsibilities defined. It’s time we all come together to take action collectively and not independently.

We all know, the DPDP framework will be in full force by 2027. That window is not long. Platforms must move now building Indian-language consent flows, accounting for shared devices, and designing age-appropriate digital environments rather than waiting for enforcement.

The three sisters in Ghaziabad deserved better. Every child who opens a phone today deserves better. Not a ban. Not a headline. A system that actually works.