Author: Ananya Singh a student of National Forensic Sciences University, Delhi
To the Point
The Draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 convert the DPDP Act, 2023 into day-to-day obligations for organizations and clear rights for individuals. They standardize consent, strengthen breach reporting, grade compliance for startups versus large platforms, and define practical workflows for access, correction, and erasure of personal data.
Use of legal jargon
The Rules operationalize core data protection doctrines—lawful processing, purpose limitation, data minimization, storage limitation, accuracy, integrity, and confidentiality—through a graded compliance regime. “Data Fiduciaries” (who determine purposes and means) and “Data Processors” (who process on behalf) must implement technical and organizational safeguards commensurate with risk, with “Significant Data Fiduciaries” subject to enhanced obligations such as impact assessments, audits, and independent oversight. Consent is made specific, informed, unbundled, and revocable via standardized notices and consent managers, while “Data Principals” (individuals) gain reinforced rights to access, rectify, and erase personal data. A digital-by-design Data Protection Board provides quasi-judicial oversight and administrative penalties, anchoring due diligence expectations and accountability.
The Proof
The Rules follow a transparent public consultation path and align with global privacy norms, translating statutory principles into practical steps: clear consent prompts, withdrawal flows, consent manager registration, 72-hour breach escalation internally and prompt regulatory/user notices, and audit trails for defensible compliance. Graded duties reduce burdens on startups while imposing higher governance standards on high-risk, large-scale platforms. Organizations are nudged toward measurable controls—data maps, retention schedules, access controls, encryption at rest/in transit, incident response playbooks, and role-based training—making compliance auditable and user trust tangible.
Abstract
This article explains the DPDP Rules, 2025 in plain language for quick adoption by legal teams, startups, product managers, and compliance officers. It clarifies who is covered, how consent works, breach timelines, what user rights actually mean operationally, and where uncertainty remains (notably cross-border data transfers and thresholds for Significant Data Fiduciary designation). It presents a practical, rights-forward, and innovation-aware picture: citizens receive easier-to-use privacy controls; organizations receive predictable obligations scaled by risk; and the state receives a modern enforcement architecture that supports India’s digital economy while converging with international standards. The discussion concludes with a concise compliance checklist and a note on harmonization with sectoral regulations.
Because the DPDP framework is new, case law is only beginning to form. However, three jurisprudential anchors will guide interpretation:
Constitutional privacy: The right to privacy recognized as intrinsic to personal liberty under Article 21 supports the Rules’ user-centric design and necessity-proportionality analysis for data processing.
Administrative law principles: Fairness, reasonableness, and non-arbitrariness will guide Board action, penalty proportionality, and review standards in early challenges.
Comparative influence: While not binding, global jurisprudence on consent, transparency, and accountability will be persuasive where Indian statutory text aligns (e.g., clarity of consent, data subject rights, breach duties), informing both Board orders and judicial review.
Core features explained simply
Who is covered?
Any Indian entity processing personal data and foreign entities offering goods or services in India fall within scope. Data Processors must act only on documented instructions from Data Fiduciaries and implement appropriate security. High-risk or very large platforms may be designated as Significant Data Fiduciaries (SDFs) based on factors like volume, sensitivity, and potential harm, triggering enhanced obligations.
Consent and notices
Consent must be informed, specific to purposes, presented in clear language, and as easy to withdraw as to give. Notices must explain what data is collected, for which purposes, retention periods, with whom it is shared, and how rights can be exercised. Consent Managers provide a standardized interface for grant/withdrawal, with auditable logs. For children and persons with disabilities, consent must follow special safeguards, often through verified guardians.
User rights in practice
Access: Individuals can request a copy of personal data held and a summary of processing activities, including recipients and retention.
Correction and erasure: Individuals can correct inaccurate data and request erasure when purposes are fulfilled, consent is withdrawn, or retention is no longer necessary. Organizations must honor erasure subject to legal retention requirements.
Grievances and nominees: A user can complain via a simple digital mechanism and appoint a digital nominee to exercise rights in case of death or incapacity.
Security and breach response
Organizations must implement risk-based controls: encryption, access management, logging, vulnerability remediation, and vendor oversight. On a confirmed breach that risks harm, organizations should notify the Data Protection Board promptly (commonly within 72 hours internally as a best practice), and affected users without undue delay where there is likely risk of harm. Incident playbooks, forensics, and post-incident reviews are expected.
Accountability and governance
Fiduciaries must be able to demonstrate compliance: data inventories, purpose registers, consent records, DPIAs for high-risk processing, and periodic audits for SDFs. Vendor contracts must fix roles, security requirements, and return/erasure at end of service. Training is essential, with role-based modules for engineering, product, marketing, and customer support teams. Senior leadership should review privacy KPIs and breach metrics.
Cross-border transfers
Outbound transfers are expected to be permitted subject to government notifications/conditions, moving away from blanket localization. Organizations should maintain transfer maps, assess recipient jurisdiction safeguards, and implement contractual controls and technical measures (e.g., encryption, key management) to mitigate risk.
Graded compliance
Startups and MSMEs receive proportionate duties to avoid over-compliance costs, focusing on essential controls (clear notices, consent hygiene, basic security, streamlined rights workflows). SDFs must go further: DPIAs, periodic audits, documented risk management, and possibly appointing senior accountable roles to oversee privacy programs.
Practical compliance roadmap
Map data and define roles
Inventory personal data categories, systems, flows (ingest, storage, analytics, sharing), and classify whether acting as Data Fiduciary or Data Processor. Identify high-risk activities (e.g., profiling, large-scale sensitive data, vulnerable users).
Upgrade notices and consent UX
Write purpose-specific notices with layered detail; implement consent prompts with just-in-time explanations; ensure withdrawal is one click or equally simple. Capture and store consent metadata (who, when, how, scope, version). Integrate with consent managers where applicable.
Rights handling
Stand up a rights portal or helpdesk flow to authenticate requests, retrieve data, make corrections, and process erasures. Automate searches across data stores; build retention schedules; create an erasure “pre-notice” workflow to alert users where needed and then purge, except where legal retention applies.
Breach readiness
Adopt a 72-hour internal escalation window, maintain an incident response team, rehearse tabletop exercises, and pre-draft notification templates. Keep an evidence trail for regulatory inquiries. Coordinate with processors/sub-processors for multi-party incidents.
Vendor and cross-border controls
Update DPAs (data processing agreements) to define instructions, security controls, subcontracting approvals, audits, and post-termination deletion. For cross-border transfers, maintain a register, assess legal protections, and implement contractual/technical safeguards.
Governance and culture
Define an accountability owner (or team) for privacy. Track KPIs: rights turnaround time, breach MTTR, consent withdrawal friction, audit nonconformities. Train staff; refresh training annually and at role changes. Prepare for Board inquiries and potential audits if designated SDF.
Open issues and tips
SDF designation clarity: Monitor thresholds/criteria and prepare a “lite DPIA” approach that can scale to full DPIAs if designated.
Cross-border approval mechanics: Watch for country lists or transfer conditions; design modular transfer addenda to slot in new requirements.
Sector harmonization: Align with IT intermediary rules, payments, telecom, health/EdTech norms. Where overlap exists, meet the stricter standard or implement layered compliance.
Usability matters: A simple rights portal and clear consent text will reduce complaints and improve trust more than any policy document.
Documentation wins: If it isn’t documented, regulators will treat it as not done. Keep concise, living documents—data maps, retention schedules, DPIA registers, incident logs.
Conclusion
The DPDP Rules, 2025 represent India’s pragmatic privacy turn: rights that people can actually use, and duties that companies can actually implement. For individuals, the regime promises clearer choices, faster responses, and real erasure. For organizations, it offers scalable rules—startups focus on essentials; high-risk platforms build mature governance and DPIAs. For the state, it delivers a digital-by-design enforcement model that can evolve quickly with technology. With a few clarifications on SDF thresholds, cross-border mechanics, and grievance timelines, roll-out can be rights-strong and business-friendly, positioning India among leading privacy jurisdictions while preserving room for innovation.
FAQS
What is the DPDP Act and how do the 2025 Rules fit?
The DPDP Act, 2023 is India’s main privacy law; the 2025 Rules provide practical details—what notices should contain, how consent and withdrawal work, breach reporting, user rights handling, and governance.
Do small start-ups have the same obligations as big platforms?
No. Duties are proportionate. Start-ups implement core controls—clear notices, consent hygiene, basic security, and simple rights portals—while Significant Data Fiduciaries face enhanced obligations like DPIAs, audits, and tighter oversight.
How fast must breaches be reported?
Aim to assess and escalate internally within 72 hours and notify the regulator and affected users without undue delay where harm is likely. Prepare an incident response plan now—roles, forensics, and templates.
Are cross-border data transfers prohibited?
Not categorically. Transfers are expected to be allowed subject to government notifications or conditions. Map transfers, assess risks, and use contractual/technical safeguards.
What practical rights do users gain?
Easy access to a copy of their data, simple correction flows, and erasure when purposes end or consent is withdrawn, plus the ability to appoint a digital nominee. Clear, standardized notices and consent prompts should reduce confusion.
