New Delhi: On 29 October 2025, the Delhi High Court, in a Division Bench comprising Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya (Chief Justice) and Tushar Rao Gedela (Justice), asked the central government to clarify how it intends to address the rising concerns surrounding DeepSeek AI.
Major Highlights of DeepSeek AI Case
The petition, filed by advocate Bhavna Sharma, argued that DeepSeek — a Chinese-origin AI chatbot — poses serious threats to privacy, data protection and sovereignty of India.
Read Also: Where Does India Stand In Using AI For Public Service & Delivery
Earlier this year, the Court had already issued a notice to the government in February regarding the same issue, indicating this is not a new matter but one of escalating urgency.
Key Highlights of High Court demand on DeepSeek AI Case
The Bench asked the Central Government Standing Counsel, Ishkaran Bhandari, to take instructions from the concerned ministries and present a plan on “how the ministry is going to tackle this”.
The Court emphasised that “there is no doubt that this is an issue which needs to be tackled at the initial stage as well.”
The next hearing will bundle this petition with other matters raising similar concerns around AI tools.
Why DeepSeek AI Is Under Scrutiny
Privacy & Data Protection Concerns: According to the petition, DeepSeek fails to comply with India’s data protection frameworks, including the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011.
National Sovereignty & Security Threat: The AI tool is alleged to store or transmit user data through servers located outside India, raising the risk of foreign access, leakage or misuse — thus, potentially impacting India’s sovereignty and integrity.
Global Precedents & Red Flags: Several countries have taken action against DeepSeek: for example, Italy banned the tool over privacy law concerns. India’s petition points to similar international concerns to bolster its argument.
Role of the Petitionist & Bench
Bhavna Sharma: The advocate who filed the public interest litigation (PIL). Her petition demands directions to the government to frame guidelines, block access to such AI tools and protect citizen data.
Read Also: This Young IAS Officer in Maharashtra Uses AI To Improve Nutrition Level of Tribal Students
Bench of CJI Upadhyaya & Justice Gedela: Demonstrating judicial urgency, the Court reminded the government that initial stage intervention is necessary and insisted on instructions to be taken.
What’s Next: Government, Guidelines & Regulation
The government now has the task of providing a clear set of instructions or policy to address DeepSeek’s presence and potential risks. Specific possible actions:
- Drafting or updating guidelines for AI-tool access, especially those developed overseas.
- Blocking or restricting government device usage of such chatbots until compliance is ensured.
- Enforcing data localisation, monitoring cross-border data flows, and ensuring security practices.
- Public awareness campaigns about the dangers of using unvetted AI tools.
Why This Matters: Impact on Users & Nation
- For everyday users in India, the DeepSeek controversy serves as a wake-up call – Using AI chatbots isn’t just about convenience—it may carry hidden risks of data exposure, misuse or unacceptable privacy trade-offs.
- For policymaking and national interest – This case highlights the need for robust AI regulation, faster response mechanisms and clarifying where emerging tools stand under Indian law.
