A private member’s Bill introduced in the Lok Sabha seeks to impose strict ethical obligations, transparency requirements and heavy penalties on developers and deployers of artificial intelligence, signalling India’s most ambitious attempt yet to regulate the rapidly expanding use of AI technologies.
When a private member’s Bill proposing fines of up to ₹5 crore for the misuse of artificial intelligence was introduced in Parliament, it quietly opened a new front in India’s evolving debate over how far technology should be allowed to shape public life before the law intervenes.
The Artificial Intelligence (Ethics and Accountability) Bill, 2025, introduced by BJP MP Bharti Pardhi, seeks to establish a statutory framework governing the development, deployment and use of AI systems across sectors ranging from law enforcement and finance to employment and surveillance. While the Bill has not yet been taken up for detailed discussion, its provisions mark a notable shift toward formal regulation of AI in India one that mirrors growing global unease over algorithmic bias, opaque decision-making and unchecked surveillance.
A Regulatory Architecture for Artificial Intelligence
At the heart of the proposed law is the creation of an independent Ethics Committee for Artificial Intelligence, to be constituted by the Central government. The committee would be chaired by an expert in ethics and technology and include representatives from academia, industry, civil society and government, alongside specialists in law, data science and human rights.
The committee would be tasked with framing ethical guidelines for AI technologies, monitoring compliance, reviewing instances of misuse or algorithmic bias and promoting awareness and capacity-building among developers, deployers and users of AI systems. Any individual or group affected by the misuse of AI would be entitled to file a complaint before the committee, which would be empowered to investigate and recommend penalties or remedial measures.
In its Statement of Objects and Reasons, the Bill describes this framework as a necessary response to the growing influence of AI systems on individual rights and democratic values, arguing that ethical oversight must evolve alongside technological capability.
Penalties, Liability and the Cost of Non-Compliance
The Bill proposes penalties of up to ₹5 crore for violations, depending on the severity of the breach, along with the suspension or revocation of licences for deploying AI systems. In cases of repeat violations, the law allows for the possibility of criminal liability, as may be prescribed.
Developers of AI systems would be subject to detailed obligations designed to promote transparency and accountability. These include mandatory disclosure of the intended purpose and limitations of AI systems, the data sources and methodologies used for training algorithms, and the rationale behind AI-driven decisions that affect individuals.
To address algorithmic bias, the Bill mandates regular audits, diversity and inclusivity in training datasets, and the withdrawal of AI systems found to exhibit significant bias until corrective measures are implemented. Developers would also be required to maintain records demonstrating compliance with ethical standards under the proposed law.
The emphasis on audits and documentation reflects a growing concern among policymakers that AI systems often operate as “black boxes,” making it difficult for affected individuals to understand—or challenge—the decisions made about them.
Limits on Surveillance and High-Risk Decision-Making
One of the more consequential provisions of the Bill places explicit limits on the use of AI for surveillance. Such deployment would be confined to lawful purposes and would require prior approval from the Ethics Committee, introducing an additional layer of oversight in a domain that has increasingly drawn scrutiny from civil liberties advocates.
In critical decision-making areas such as law enforcement, financial credit and employment, AI systems would be subject to heightened ethical scrutiny. The Bill stipulates that such systems must not discriminate on the basis of race, religion or gender and must undergo ethical review by the committee before deployment.
These provisions align with broader international trends, including regulatory efforts in the European Union, to classify certain AI applications as “high-risk” and subject them to stricter controls.
Balancing Innovation With Democratic Safeguards
Supporters of the Bill argue that its intent is not to stifle innovation but to ensure that AI technologies serve the public interest. The Statement of Objects and Reasons emphasises the need for a balanced approach—one that fosters AI’s positive impacts while safeguarding against misuse.
By empowering an independent ethics body and prescribing robust penalties for violations, the legislation seeks to embed accountability into the AI ecosystem at an early stage of its growth in India. Critics, however, are likely to question how such oversight would be implemented in practice and whether a private member’s Bill can meaningfully shape policy in an area that intersects with national security, economic competitiveness and digital governance.
For now, the proposal stands as a marker of Parliament’s growing recognition that artificial intelligence, once treated largely as a technical or economic issue, is increasingly a matter of law, rights and public accountability.
