top of page

By:

Sagari Gupta

24 March 2026 at 7:46:04 pm

India’s Digital Footprint Is No Longer a Choice

India’s digital economy has made personal data unavoidable. The harder task is ensuring that citizens retain meaningful control over the trails they leave behind. In August this year, the Unified Payments Interface processed about 24.5 billion transactions worth nearly Rs. 29.8 lakh crore, according to data from the National Payments Corporation of India. Aadhaar’s authentication system recorded more than 17,759 crore transactions in FY2025-26, according to UIDAI’s dashboard. Behind these...

India’s Digital Footprint Is No Longer a Choice

India’s digital economy has made personal data unavoidable. The harder task is ensuring that citizens retain meaningful control over the trails they leave behind. In August this year, the Unified Payments Interface processed about 24.5 billion transactions worth nearly Rs. 29.8 lakh crore, according to data from the National Payments Corporation of India. Aadhaar’s authentication system recorded more than 17,759 crore transactions in FY2025-26, according to UIDAI’s dashboard. Behind these numbers sits a question Indian policy has yet to answer clearly: what happens to the data these systems generate, and who controls it? The most pressing privacy question in India today is not what people choose to post online. It is what they are required to leave behind to take part in everyday life. A UPI payment leaves a transaction trail. A loan application generates financial records. A food-delivery order records your address and buying habits. A cab ride shows where you work and when you travel. A social-media post adds something more personal: what you think, like, fear or believe. Individually, these fragments look harmless. Together, they can describe a remarkably detailed version of a person’s life. Orwellian Society This is not digital technology invading a society that was once offline. It is a society in which digital systems have become part of ordinary economic life. For a software professional, deleting social media may be an inconvenience. For a domestic worker paid through a bank account, a student applying for a scholarship or a pensioner completing an identity check, opting out is not a workable choice. Consider an ordinary Saturday. You check the weather, search for a medicine, order groceries, pay through UPI, book a cab and make an online purchase. No single action tells a complete story. Together, they reveal your location, spending patterns, household composition, health concerns and daily routine. Artificial intelligence changes what this data means, because machine systems are increasingly good at connecting fragments that once sat in separate databases. The concern is not that an AI system knows what you searched for once. It is that automated systems can identify patterns across millions of ordinary interactions that, taken individually, meant little. The problem is also one of asymmetry. The individual usually sees only the service being offered; the organisation sees the accumulated information behind it. A single transaction may be trivial, but millions of such transactions can become commercially or administratively valuable when linked and analysed. That makes data different from many other commodities. Once information has been copied, combined or used to build a profile, the original individual may have little visibility into its subsequent journey. The question is therefore not simply who collected the data, but who can combine it, infer from it and act upon those inferences. The public debate on AI scraping is often too simple. Not every online interaction is pulled into an AI model, and not every company holds every piece of a person’s digital life. Collection depends on the platform, its policies, its technical architecture and the applicable law. But the gap is real: the capacity to analyse vast volumes of information is growing faster than most people’s understanding of where their information goes. A PwC India survey found that 56 percent of consumers did not know their rights over personal data, while 70 percent said privacy policies were difficult to understand. When a person does not understand what they are agreeing to, consent risks becoming a formality rather than a genuine choice. There is also a distinction between privacy and secrecy. A person may have nothing embarrassing to hide and still reasonably object to a detailed record of their movements, purchases and associations being assembled without meaningful control. Privacy is less about having something to conceal than about retaining a degree of agency over one’s own life. A Right on Paper The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 gives individuals rights to correct and erase personal data, subject to the conditions and exceptions set out in the law. The government notified the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules in November 2025, with provisions coming into force in phases. On paper, this changes the relationship between citizens and the organisations that hold their data. In practice, most people do not think in terms of “Data Principal” or “Data Fiduciary” when an app asks for access to their information. They think about whether the app will still work if they say no. That is the test that decides whether a data-protection law functions on the ground. A small retailer selling online may not fully understand the compliance requirements. An elderly customer faces a long privacy notice before completing a routine transaction. A young user accepts an app’s terms because refusing means losing access to a service that friends or employers already use. A right that exists on paper does not guarantee a person’s ability to exercise it. The ability to protect personal data is not distributed evenly. A high-income professional can pay for privacy-focused software, encrypted communication and legal advice. Someone on a smaller income uses whichever free application is available. The same divide applies to time. A person who understands technology can adjust permissions and request deletion. A person working two jobs may accept an app’s terms because reading a 30-page privacy notice at 11 p.m. is hardly realistic. This produces an uneven outcome. The people with the strongest ability to protect their data are often the same people with the clearest sense of what is being collected. Those with fewer resources tend to generate more data while having less power to question how it is used. This is why treating “going offline” as the solution has limited use in India. Cash does not cover every digital transaction. A basic phone does not replace every digital service. Deleting a social-media account does not erase bank or government records. Refusing every digital platform carries its own economic cost, particularly for people who depend on digital payments for income. The realistic goal is not disappearance. It is control. India’s digital economy should not be measured only by payment volumes or platform reach. It should also be measured by whether people understand the exchange taking place underneath that convenience. Regulators should track whether a person can find out what a service holds about them, correct inaccurate information, delete data that is no longer necessary and withdraw consent without clicking through several layers of settings. The sharper test is what happens when data collected for one purpose becomes useful for another. Rising Stakes The stakes will rise as India’s digital infrastructure becomes more deeply embedded in public services, finance and commerce. The country has built impressive systems for moving money and verifying identity; the next challenge is to build equally credible systems for limiting what can be inferred from the information those systems generate. The next phase of India’s privacy debate should move past the idea of digital disappearance, because most people have no practical way to leave the systems through which they earn, pay, borrow, travel, study and access public services. The more useful task is making those systems answerable to the people whose lives they record. The measure of digital freedom is not whether a citizen leaves no trace. It is whether they have a say over where that trace leads. (The writer is an independent public policy researcher. Views personal.)

How Long Will the Selectors Wait Before They Give Vaibhav Sooryavanshi the India Cap?

May 31
4 min read

In the grand theatre of Indian cricket selection, where committees move with the urgency of a sloth on sleeping pills, we have a genuine phenomenon on our hands: Vaibhav Sooryavanshi. Fifteen years old. Yes, fifteen. The boy is still closer in age to a school science project than to a driving license, yet he bats like he’s got a personal grudge against bowlers and gravity itself. But fear not, dear cricket fans. Our wise selectors are on the case. They’re thinking. They’re deliberating. They’re probably waiting for him to complete his tenth standard exams first.


Let’s recap the rap sheet of this pint-sized destroyer, because it reads like a satirical fever dream. At 13, he became the youngest player to bag an IPL contract. At 14, the youngest debutant in IPL history. Still 14, the youngest centurion in men’s T20 cricket—101 off 38 balls, a knock so violent it made seasoned pros check if their insurance covered emotional trauma. In IPL 2026, he’s been dropping bombs: 776 runs in 16 matches, a strike rate flirting with 237, one century, five fifties, and a record 72 sixes that made Chris Gayle file a police complaint for identity theft.


He guided India to U19 World Cup glory earlier this year with a Player of the Tournament award and a 175 off 80 in the final. The kid treats Jasprit Bumrah like a net bowler and Pat Cummins like a friendly neighborhood spinner. And yet, here we are, in May 2026, still asking the profound philosophical question: When will this child get an India cap?


Oh, the selectors must be busy. Perhaps they’re conducting a thorough background check to ensure he’s not actually a time-traveling 28-year-old in disguise. Or maybe they’re waiting for him to fill out a bit more, gain those crucial “senior player muscles” that apparently develop only after repeated domestic grind and several disappointing tours of England in April rain. Because nothing says “ready for international cricket” like surviving three rainy days in Manchester while scoring 12 not out.


The humor here is darker than a Delhi power cut. We live in an era where T20 cricket has the shelf life of a tweet, yet we treat prodigies like fine wine that needs decades in the cellar. “Let him play more India A matches,” they’ll say, as if the boy hasn’t already embarrassed international bowlers in the IPL. Imagine the conversation in the selection meeting:


“Gentlemen, Sooryavanshi just hit 97 off 29 balls with 12 sixes.”


“Impressive. Has he played enough Ranji Trophy though?”


“He debuted in Ranji at 12!”


“Still… let’s give him time to mature.”


Mature? The kid is 15. At this rate, by the time they pick him, he’ll be 18, married, with two kids, and wondering why his prime was spent smashing domestic bowlers while the national team kept losing middle overs.


Sarcasm aside (well, not really), this cautious approach is comedy gold in a sport that celebrates audacity. Indian cricket has a proud history of fast-tracking talent when it suits—remember Yuvraj, Kohli, or even the occasional punt on raw pace. But with Sooryavanshi, it feels like the selectors are auditioning for a role in a particularly slow episode of The Office. “Yes, he’s destroying attacks, but what about his ability to play the forward defensive in a Test match that no one will watch?” Never mind that the boy’s technique looks cleaner than most seniors, and his fearlessness is pure.


Legends are already banging the drum. Kumar Sangakkara has backed him for a call-up. Virat Kohli gifted him a signed cap (the closest thing to official recognition so far). Sehwag, Gavaskar, even Rabada from the opposition camp—everyone sees it. The boy isn’t just talented; he’s a generational storm. Yet the BCCI selection machinery operates on “process.” Process, in this context, apparently means watching him dominate for another two seasons while muttering about “long-term planning.”


Picture the alternate universe where they actually pick him now for the upcoming T20Is. Opposition captains would call for a timeout just to process the horror. Bowlers would develop sudden finger injuries. Commentators would run out of superlatives and start speaking in tongues. “And Sooryavanshi has dispatched that to the orbit… again.” Sponsors would print jerseys in children’s sizes. The meme economy would boom.


Instead, we’ll likely get the measured, responsible approach. He’ll tour Sri Lanka with India A, score 800 runs at 250 strike rate, and then someone will say, “Let’s see how he handles pressure in Ireland.” Ireland! Because nothing tests a prodigy like a friendly against associate nations.


Look, I get it. Hype can destroy young players. Injuries, form dips, the suffocating weight of expectation in India—it’s a minefield. But when the minefield is being cleared by the player himself with sixes that travel faster than most cars on Mumbai roads, perhaps it’s time to trust the evidence.


Vaibhav Sooryavanshi isn’t asking for special treatment. He’s just out there doing what prodigies do: making the impossible routine. At 15, he’s already rewritten records books that veterans spent careers chasing. The selectors waiting game isn’t caution anymore—it’s comedy. Expensive, frustrating comedy.


So here’s my humble plea, wrapped in sarcasm: Dear selectors, the boy has done everything except perhaps file his income tax return (which, at his age, is probably handled by his parents anyway). Give him the cap before he needs to shave regularly. Before he starts giving fatherly advice to Rohit Sharma. Before the rest of the world starts wondering if India is run by a selection panel or a group of particularly anxious accountants.


Because if you wait much longer, we won’t be celebrating a new Indian star. We’ll be explaining to future generations why we kept the most exciting talent on the bench while he was busy conquering the planet.


And that, my friends, would be the real joke.


(The writer is a senior journalist based in Mumbai.)

Comments


bottom of page