![JMA – Ninja & Deep Jandu [Official MV] Kaptaan](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-dsfIh319s0/maxresdefault.jpg "JMA – Ninja & Deep Jandu [Official MV] Kaptaan")
The guidelines, notified by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on February 6, replace a more prescriptive consultation draft issued in October 2025. That draft had proposed time-bound accessibility across entire content libraries, including a target of making 100% of an OTT platform’s catalogue accessible within 24 months.
In the final version, this requirement has been set aside. Platforms are instead required to provide accessibility features for newly released content after a 36-month implementation period, while legacy catalogues are to be addressed on a best-effort basis.
The guidelines also mandate that platforms prominently display, at the time of release, content descriptors indicating available accessibility features, including for promotional audio-visual material, and ensure that these features are integrated and fully functional across their user interfaces.
Under the draft framework, OTT publishers were expected to meet phased targets of 30% accessibility within 12 months, 60% within 18 months, and full compliance within two years. The final guidelines abandon these benchmarks altogether, significantly easing compliance pressure on platforms with large legacy libraries.
Timelines have also been reworked. While the draft required new content to carry accessibility features within six months of notification, the final version defers this obligation to the end of a three-year transition period. Quarterly compliance reporting, which the draft envisaged from the outset, will now begin only after this 36-month window closes.
The substantive accessibility standards remain largely unchanged. Platforms will still be required to offer at least one accessibility feature each for viewers with hearing and visual impairments, such as closed or open captions, Indian Sign Language interpretation, or audio descriptions. User interfaces must also be compatible with assistive technologies.However, the final guidelines relax certain operational prescriptions. The draft had specified that Indian Sign Language interpreters should generally appear in the bottom-right corner of the screen. The notified rules remove this positional requirement, giving publishers greater flexibility in presentation.
At the same time, the government has tightened the enforcement architecture. The final guidelines lay out a detailed three-tier grievance redressal mechanism, beginning with self-regulation by publishers and escalating to self-regulatory bodies and a central monitoring committee chaired by a joint secretary-level official. Timelines for acknowledging and resolving complaints have been clearly defined, a level of procedural detail that was missing from the draft.
The treatment of exemptions has also been refined. While both versions exempt live and deferred-live content, audio-only programming, and short-form content, the final rules clarify that the short-form exemption applies only to standalone material and not to episodic segments released in parts.
The guidelines are anchored in the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, and follow earlier advisories urging OTT platforms to improve accessibility.
In its earlier submission to the ministry, the Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI) had argued that the draft accessibility guidelines were impractical, financially burdensome and legally questionable. While supporting the objective of improving access for persons with disabilities, it said the draft ignored the production and licensing realities of large, multilingual catalogues.
IAMAI pointed out that creating captions or audio descriptions costs about Rs 15,000 to Rs 20,000 per episode, with expenses rising sharply across multiple languages, making mandatory retrofitting unviable. It flagged the proposed timelines of six and 24 months as unrealistic and warned that smaller platforms would be hit the hardest.
The industry body also said that the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 did not mandate such obligations on private platforms and called for a phased and flexible framework.
