An ally of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has triggered a fresh battle over children’s online lives by proposing a nationwide bar on social media use for anyone under sixteen. The move drops India into the middle of a fast‑intensifying global argument over how far governments should go in policing apps like Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat for teenagers. It also tests whether one of the world’s youngest populations will accept sweeping restrictions in the name of mental health and safety.
At stake is more than screen time. The proposal forces a reckoning over who should carry responsibility for young people’s digital habits, from parents and schools to platforms and the state, and whether blunt bans can work in a country where cheap smartphones and data have rewired daily life. As other governments experiment with age checks, curfews and outright prohibitions, India is now weighing whether to follow with some of the toughest rules anywhere.
The Devarayalu proposal and what it would do
The immediate flashpoint is a private member’s bill from L.S.K. Devarayalu, a lawmaker allied with Modi, that would block all social media access for children under sixteen across India. In his pitch, Devarayalu argues that children are “becoming addicted” to platforms and that a clean break is needed to protect their development, a stance that aligns with growing political concern about the psychological toll of endless feeds. The proposal, framed as a national standard rather than a patchwork of state rules, would put India among the strictest countries on youth social media if it ever became law, and it has already drawn attention from global firms that dominate the Indian market.
Devarayalu’s initiative is not a vague idea but a detailed plan, laid out in a 15‑page document that spells out how platforms would be compelled to keep under‑sixteen users out. His status as a Modi ally gives the move extra weight inside the ruling coalition, even if private member’s bills rarely pass in their original form. Reporting on the proposal notes that the lawmaker, identified as L.S.K. Devarayalu, has formally introduced the measure in parliament, positioning it as a response to what he sees as a crisis of attention and behavior among teenagers who spend hours on apps like Instagram and TikTok, according to Modi ally and Mr Devarayalu’s own explanation.
From Andhra Pradesh to New Delhi, a broader Indian push
Devarayalu’s bill does not emerge in a vacuum, it builds on a wave of concern that has been rising inside India’s policy circles for months. In the southern state of Andhra Pradesh, the government has already formed a Group of Ministers to study whether to restrict or ban social media access for children under sixteen, a sign that state leaders see youth online behavior as a governance issue rather than a purely private matter. That panel is examining options that range from time limits to full blocks, and it has been tasked with figuring out how to make platforms, not just parents, responsible for compliance, according to the Andhra Pradesh government’s own description of the mandate.
Officials in Andhra have gone further by calling in major technology companies for talks as they weigh a state‑level ban for children, underscoring how any serious attempt to curb teen social media use will have to run through the likes of Meta, ByteDance and Snap. Those consultations are explicitly linked to legislation passed in Australia, which has become a reference point for Indian policymakers looking for models that might withstand legal and political scrutiny. The outreach, described in News coverage of Andhra’s deliberations, shows that even before Devarayalu’s national proposal, parts of India were already exploring aggressive steps to keep children off social platforms.
Global experiments, from Australia to France
India’s debate is unfolding as other governments race ahead with their own experiments in shutting minors out of social media. Australia has officially implemented what is described as the world’s first nationwide social media ban for children under sixteen, a move that has instantly become a touchstone for lawmakers elsewhere who want to show they are acting decisively. That law, highlighted in a Busine report, has fed the sense among Indian politicians that a hard line is not only possible but politically saleable, especially when framed as a child protection measure rather than a speech restriction.
France is moving in a similar direction, with a law that would make it the second country after Australia to adopt a nationwide framework for keeping children off social media, although in the French case children or parents are not punished under the law. That distinction matters for India, where enforcement capacity is limited and criminalizing families would be politically explosive. Some Indian commentary has already drawn a line from Australia’s example to the way Andhra Pradesh is thinking about its own rules, with one widely shared summary noting that Andhra Pradesh Considers Social Media Ban for Children Under sixteen Inspired by Australia’s approach, as described in an Inspired post that highlights how quickly policy ideas now travel across borders.
Economic and political stakes for Modi’s government
For Modi’s administration, the push to rein in teen social media use intersects with a broader effort to shape the digital economy without scaring off investment. India is one of the largest markets for platforms like Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat, and any blanket ban on under‑sixteen users would affect tens of millions of current or potential customers. That is why the government’s own economic advisers have floated more calibrated options, with one senior official arguing that India Should Consider Age Based Curbs on Social Media rather than a simple on‑off switch, and explicitly suggesting limits on daily hours and more shared offline activities for young people, according to a Reuters account that also cites the figure 38 in the context of how many countries are now experimenting with similar rules.
Politically, Devarayalu’s bill gives Modi’s allies a chance to present themselves as defenders of family values and child welfare at a time when digital anxiety runs high among parents. An Indian Prime Minister ally pushing a hard line on teen social media also sends a message to global tech firms that the government expects more cooperation on content and safety. Yet the same reporting notes that companies and free‑speech groups are already wary, warning that such a ban could be difficult to enforce, open the door to broader censorship and undermine India’s image as an open digital market, especially if it is seen as a template for future restrictions on adults.
How enforcement, parents and platforms could collide
The practical question is how any under‑sixteen ban would actually work in a country where teenagers often share devices with parents and where identity documents are not always digitized. Devarayalu’s own proposal, as described in multiple accounts, would put the onus squarely on platforms to verify ages and block access, rather than punishing children or their families. One summary of the bill notes that an India MP Proposes Bill to Ban Social Media Access for Children Under sixteen, identifying the effort as part of a broader push by a Prime Minister Narendra Modi ally to force companies to redesign their systems around age checks, according to an India MP Proposes post that has circulated widely among policy watchers.
At the same time, regional political dynamics are shaping how the idea is received. TDP MP L.S.K. Devarajulu, described as an NDA ally, has been highlighted in social media posts for introducing a private member’s bill on Jan 30, 2026 that would block all social media accounts for children under sixteen, a detail that underscores how coalition partners are helping drive the agenda rather than leaving it solely to Modi’s core party. That framing, captured in an TDP post, suggests that any eventual law will have to balance national ambitions with the realities of state politics, parental expectations and the technical limits of age‑verification systems that are still far from foolproof.
