Delhi High Court seeks Centre's response to IndiaMART's plea against spam call and message regulations

India’s largest business-to-business (B2B) online marketplace company IndiaMART has approached the Delhi High Court challenging the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) regulations on Unsolicited Commercial Communication (UCC), also known as spam calls and messages. .The company has challenged Regulation 25 of the Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preference Regulations, as amended in 2025, as far as it applies to B2B communications.Regulation 25 establishes a complaint-driven enforcement system for spam and is run primarily by telecom service providers like Airtel, Jio and others. It is IndiaMART’s case that this law has given access providers the authority to check whether the company has sent unsolicited communications, and to blacklist them. .The petition came up for hearing before on Tuesday before a Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, which issued notice to the TRAI and Central government's Department of Telecommunications (DoT). The Court said that the case will be heard next in March 2026. .In its plea, IndiaMART has argued that Regulation 25 unfairly treats legitimate B2B outreach as unsolicited communication and fails to distinguish between private individuals and business entities that voluntarily publish their contact details to receive commercial enquiries.It argues that subjecting B2B communications to a complaint-driven regime violates constitutional guarantees of equality, free speech, and the right to trade under Articles 14, 19, and 21.“Regulation 25 establishes a punitive, action-first regime wherein mere receipt of five complaints from “unique recipients” within ten days triggers enterprise-wide suspension of telecom resources, followed by blacklisting and device-level blocking for up to one year. These drastic consequences are imposed prior to any meaningful hearing, with only a post-facto representation permitted,” the plea states. It adds that the framework reverses the principles of natural justice and presumes guilt based on complaint volume alone, irrespective of the legitimacy, context, or motive behind the complaints. “The penalties are manifestly disproportionate to the alleged infraction and violate Articles 14 and 21,” the petition states. The company has also raised concerns over the extensive powers granted to private telecom access providers, which can suspend or blacklist telecom resources based on a small number of complaints, often without a prior hearing. “This delegation is ultra vires the TRAI Act, which does not confer adjudicatory powers on TRAI, much less permit their sub-delegation to private parties,” it says. .Senior Advocate Darpan Wadhwa appeared for IndiaMART today. The petition was filed through advocates Naman Joshi, Priya Goyal and Aakriti Gupta. .Follow Bar and Bench channel on WhatsAppDownload the Bar and Bench Mobile app for instant access to the latest legal news.