New Delhi: Any move to extend TRAI's jurisdiction to compel an IT intermediary to dictate what information it presents to users, and mandate the sharing of proprietary data with a telecom-operated registry amounts to "encroachment" on a regulatory framework that falls within the IT Ministry's ambit, Truecaller CEO Rishit Jhunjhunwala has said amid the company's ongoing feud with the telecom regulator.
Jhunjhunwala's comments come against the backdrop of the TRAI-Truecaller tussle over the labelling of calls from the dedicated number series. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) last Friday asserted that no app can block phone calls originating from 1600 number series that are meant for communications by regulated entities and the government to citizens.
Read more: Truecaller CEO says 5.25 lakh people flag calls from 1600, 140 series as spam everyday
Truecaller has argued that spammers use phone numbers starting with 1600 and 140 to target people in violation of telecom regulator TRAI's direction; it cited data that 5.25 lakh users of the caller identification app label such calls as spam daily. "We respect the role of regulators and support measures that genuinely improve consumer safety. At the same time, extending TRAI's jurisdiction to compel an IT intermediary to dictate what information it presents to users, and to mandate the sharing of proprietary data with a telecom-operated registry, would represent an encroachment upon the regulatory framework that falls within MeitY's domain," Jhunjhunwala told PTI.
Jhunjhunwala expressed concern that if an amendment like this proceeds without the jurisdictional question being resolved, it would set a far-reaching precedent "one that could expose other IT intermediaries operating in India to regulatory claims from authorities outside MeitY's framework".
"This, in turn, has potentially serious consequences for legal certainty and investor confidence in India's technology sector," he said.
It is pertinent to mention here that TRAI has also sought to be designated as an 'authorised agency' under the IT Act, a status that would allow it to act against call management apps, and the matter is now being examined by the IT Ministry. Officials in the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) said on Monday that while the Ministry is not looking at the Truecaller issue per se, the "technical" issue of regulatory jurisdiction is under examination.
Read more: Truecaller row: TRAI seeks 'designated agency' status under IT Act; Meity examining it
"Under the IT Act, there are rules as to some agencies that are authorised to take action, like the Indian Cybercrime Coordination Centre (I4C), etc., so that is done by the appropriate government. So the question is who is the appropriate government to authorise TRAI...Department of Telecom (DoT) believes it is MeitY and MeitY says it will examine and take a call," an IT Ministry official had said.
Jhunjhunwala emphasised that there is no disagreement on the goal of eliminating spam. "We share that goal with TRAI. Our concern is that reducing consumer visibility is not the same as reducing spam," he said. Truecaller's immediate focus is "constructive engagement", he highlighted.
"We have already shared our views through the consultation process and remain committed to working with TRAI, MeitY, DoT and other stakeholders to find a solution that strengthens consumer protection without reducing transparency for users," he said.
The company says it has been engaging with the relevant authorities and sharing the data and insights it sees from millions of users in India. "We believe decisions of this importance should be informed by evidence and by the experience of consumers," he said.
Community reporting, network intelligence and regulatory enforcement should complement each other, not replace one another, Jhunjhunwala said, adding that the best outcome is one where regulators can act swiftly against bad actors while consumers continue receiving timely warnings about potentially unwanted calls.
He stressed that Truecaller has already complied with the directions issued by TRAI in good faith. "At the same time, we believe consumers benefit when they have access to community-driven information about unwanted calls. Therefore, we will continue to show the 'frequently blocked' tag," he said.
Doing so is "compliant" and "still protects consumers", he said.
"It is important to note that this tag does not get attached to a number easily. It only happens to specific numbers, when lakhs of consumers start reporting those numbers and when our algorithms make sense of the blocks, reports and calling patterns. The whitelisting of a number series, so that it prevents apps from providing user feedback, cannot be a solution," he said.
Jhunjhunwala said designated series were introduced to improve trust, "but unfortunately, some bad actors have found ways to misuse them".
"When millions of users report those calls as unwanted or suspicious, preventing those signals from being reflected back to consumers reduces transparency rather than increasing it," he argued. The Swedish caller ID platform said it has formally shared views through the consultation process and remains actively engaged with the relevant authorities.
"Our preference is always constructive dialogue rather than litigation. We are hopeful that continued engagement and evidence-based discussions can lead to a solution that protects consumers while supporting innovation. Like any responsible company, we will evaluate all available options as the regulatory process evolves, but our focus today remains on collaboration," he said.
