India’s telecom regulator, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), has reportedly approached the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) seeking approval to take action against caller identification platform Truecaller. The issue revolves around allegations that the app has been marking certain legitimate banking and financial service calls as spam.

According to reports, TRAI has received feedback from banks and financial institutions claiming that important customer service and transaction-related calls originating from designated telecom number series are being incorrectly labeled as spam by caller identification applications. These calls are often used for services such as transaction verification, fraud alerts, account updates, and other essential customer communications.

The regulator has expressed concern that such labeling may discourage customers from answering legitimate calls, potentially affecting critical banking services and security-related communications.

Focus on 140 and 1600 Series Numbers

TRAI has previously designated specific numbering series, including 1600 and certain 140-series numbers, for service and transactional communications from banks and financial institutions. The regulator believes these numbers are intended for legitimate customer interactions and should not be automatically categorized as spam.

Officials familiar with the matter have indicated that TRAI had earlier advised Truecaller not to classify calls from these designated series as spam. However, concerns reportedly continued, leading the regulator to seek further intervention from relevant government authorities.

Regulatory and Legal Questions

The matter also raises questions about regulatory jurisdiction over internet-based caller identification platforms. TRAI maintains that digital applications operating in India are expected to comply with applicable laws and regulatory frameworks. Depending on the nature of any violation, action could involve agencies such as MeitY, the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), or TRAI itself.

Sources suggest that if the government decides TRAI should have direct authority over such platforms, additional legal or administrative measures may be required to formally grant those powers under the existing regulatory framework.

Truecaller Responds

Truecaller has pushed back against the criticism and recently questioned proposals that could bring caller identification applications under direct telecom regulatory oversight.

The company’s Chief Executive Officer, Rishit Jhunjhunwala, stated that Truecaller has complied with instructions related to whitelisting designated telecom number ranges, including the 140 and 1600 series. He also raised concerns about whether telecom regulators have the authority to issue operational directives to internet-based applications.

In comments shared on social media, Jhunjhunwala argued that while the numbering framework may have been created with good intentions, there has been a significant increase in unwanted calls originating from some of these designated number ranges, creating challenges for spam detection systems.

Growing Debate on Spam Call Management

The dispute highlights a broader debate between telecom regulators, financial institutions, and caller identification platforms regarding how spam calls should be identified and managed. While regulators seek to ensure that legitimate service-related communications reach consumers, caller identification platforms continue to focus on protecting users from unwanted and potentially fraudulent calls.

The outcome of discussions between TRAI, MeitY, and industry stakeholders could influence how caller identification services operate in India in the future.