Two of the biggest industry bodies in India — BIF and COAI are fighting again. This time over the government’s new circular mandating SIM Binding for OTT platforms. Broadband India Forum or BIF represents major technology companies such as WhatsApp parent Meta, Google and others; while Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI) is the country’s biggest telecom body, whose members include Reliance Jio, Airtel and Vodafone Idea. BIF has flagged “serious concerns” regarding the government’s recent directive mandating a continuous, active SIM connection for the use of messaging applications. The forum has urged the Centre to pause implementation timelines and immediately hold stakeholder consultations on the issue. COAI on its part has welcomed the new DoT guidelines. Indian telecom companies body COAI said that making SIM binding mandatory would keep a reliable link between the user, the number, and the device, which could help reduce spam, fraud calls, and financial scams. BIF has stated that while the directive is “well-intentioned” in its goal to curb cyber-fraud, it raises significant questions regarding jurisdiction, consumer impact, and technical feasibility. Last month, the government issued directions that would ensure app-based communication services, such as WhatsApp, Signal, Telegram, and others, remain continuously linked to users’ SIM cards — a move that would make it impossible to access these apps without an active SIM associated with a registered mobile number.BIF termed it “disappointing” that directions of such far-reaching operational impact have been issued with such short implementation timelines, “without any form of public consultation or user-impact assessment”. BIF argues the move creates obligations extending “far beyond the mandate of the Telecom Act.” “BIF expresses serious concern over the directions for SIM binding issued by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) on 28 November 2025, mandating that app-based communication services remain continuously linked to the specific SIM card installed in the user’s device and forcing periodic six-hour logouts for web/desktop versions,” BIF said in its statement.
What is SIM Binding that Airtel, Vodafone-Idea and Reliance Jio have congratulated DoT for
Telecom department recently issued a directive that mandated that the user’s Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) used at registration must be bound to the services of web-based platforms such as WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Arattai, Snapchat, Sharechat and others. According to Department of Telecom (DoT) circular, within 90 days, users will no longer be able to access these apps unless the original SIM is present in the device. This means that messaging apps such as WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal, Snapchat, ShareChat, JioChat, Arattai need to ensure that their services cannot be used unless the user has an active SIM card in their device. Under the new rules, apps will now be required to automatically log users out every six hours and ask them to log in again through a QR code, when accessed on a device without SIM card.
BIF calls SIM Binding problematic
BIF in its statement added, “It becomes imperative that DoT pause the current implementation timelines, open a formal stakeholder consultation, constitute a technical working group of OS providers, Telecommunication Identifier User Entities, licensees, and security experts, and ultimately adopt a risk-based and proportionate framework consistent with constitutional standards of necessity and least intrusive means.” “The Telecommunications Act does not authorise the regulation of OTT communication platforms, nor does it provide the legislative basis to impose telecom-style operational mandates upon them,” the industry body said, adding that under the guise of the Telecom Cyber Security Amendment Rules and without any public consultation, the present SIM-binding directions extend precisely such obligations on a “select set of applications”.“The directions go beyond the statutory remit, blur settled jurisdictional boundaries between the Telecom Act and the IT Act,” BIF said, dubbing it a “problematic instance of regulatory overreach by the executive without legislative sanction and, unfortunately, any stakeholder engagement”. “By covering some services and excluding others that operate in an identical manner, the approach could have the effect of bad actors simply migrating to platforms not subject to these obligations,” according to BIF.
