New Delhi | A fresh dispute has emerged between the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and caller identification platform Truecaller over the treatment of calls originating from the 140 and 1600 number series. While TRAI maintains that these officially designated number ranges should not be classified as spam by caller identification applications, Truecaller argues that user behaviour indicates widespread distrust of such calls, with millions of people choosing to ignore or block them.
Under India’s telecom framework, the 140 series is designated for promotional commercial communications, while the 1600 series is reserved for service and transactional calls, including those made by banks and other authorised entities. These number ranges are considered whitelisted, meaning caller identification applications are expected not to categorise them as spam solely on their own assessment.
Registration Begins for FutureCrime Summit 2026, India’s Largest Cybercrime Conference
The disagreement centres on user-generated spam reports. According to Truecaller, although it initially complied with the regulatory framework by whitelisting these numbers, a significant number of users manually reported or blocked calls originating from these series. The company says its platform reflects user feedback rather than independently classifying the numbers as spam.
TRAI has objected to the practice, arguing that commercial communication numbers approved under the regulatory framework should not be labelled or blocked in a manner that may interfere with legitimate communications. Reports indicate that the regulator has sought greater powers under the Information Technology framework to address the issue involving caller identification applications.
Responding to the controversy, Truecaller Chief Executive Officer Rishit Jhunjhunwala stated that the company had implemented the whitelist despite reservations about its effectiveness. According to the company, more than 51 million calls from the two number series go unanswered every day, suggesting that users are increasingly unwilling to engage with such communications.
Truecaller further claimed that during the past eight months, users ignored approximately 81% of calls from the 140 series and 79% of calls from the 1600 series. The company also stated that manual blocking of 1600-series numbers has increased by 208% since October 2025, reflecting growing user dissatisfaction with unsolicited calls.
The regulatory debate also highlights the difference in jurisdiction between telecom operators and digital platforms. Telecom service providers operate under licences issued by the Department of Telecommunications and are directly regulated by TRAI. Caller identification applications, however, function as digital intermediaries under the Information Technology framework and are therefore not currently subject to the same level of direct regulatory oversight by the telecom regulator.
The issue has renewed discussion over balancing consumer protection against spam calls with the need to ensure the uninterrupted delivery of legitimate commercial, banking, and transactional communications. No final regulatory decision has been announced, and discussions between the relevant authorities and stakeholders are expected to continue.
About the author — Suvedita Nath is a science student with a growing interest in cybercrime and digital safety. She writes on online activity, cyber threats, and technology-driven risks. Her work focuses on clarity, accuracy, and public awareness.
