Space Law in India: No Statute Yet, but IN-SPACe Already Decides Who Flies

India has a national space agency with decades of launches behind it, and private satellite and launch companies now work alongside it. Yet search for the Indian equivalent of the UK’s Space Industry Act or the US Commercial Space Launch Act and you will find nothing. Space law in India is a stack of policy documents, sector rules and contract terms, held together by a regulator that says itself it needs a statute.

That matters to anyone taking money, hardware or customers into India. The rules are detailed, and they are enforced through the authorisation. But their legal footing is different from what a foreign lawyer may assume, so here is how the system works and where I think it is exposed.

Why India has no space Act

A draft Space Activities Bill was published in 2017. It drew heavy criticism and was never introduced. In March 2025 the minister, Jitendra Singh, told the Lok Sabha that the draft law was “undergoing thorough scrutiny in the government”. In May 2025 IN-SPACe’s chairman, Pawan Goenka, said a new draft was “almost ready” for stakeholder ministries, and added: “INSPACe itself lacks statutory authority. The bill will grant it that.”

Where it stands now is less clear. An August 2026 LiveLaw article says the bill is in inter-ministerial consultation without Cabinet approval. The Chambers guide, by Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas lawyers and updated in July 2026, says a bill is “currently pending public comments”, while also saying a redraft had not been publicly released. I could not find a government text. Treat every reported clause as unconfirmed.

What actually binds an operator today

Two documents do the work. The Indian Space Policy 2023 opens the whole value chain to non-government entities. It describes IN-SPACe as “an autonomous Government organization” and as the “single window agency” for authorising space activities by government and private bodies alike. ISRO is told to focus on research and development, while NewSpace India Limited is the public sector company under the Department of Space.

The Norms, Guidelines and Procedures (NGP), issued in May 2024, turn that policy into a 147-page rulebook.

Authorisation is needed for space activities to or from Indian territory, or within Indian jurisdiction out to the exclusive economic zone. That covers operating space objects, launch, planned re-entry, ground systems, disseminating earth observation data and in-orbit sale or transfer.

Only an Indian entity can apply. A foreign company uses a subsidiary, a joint venture or another recognised arrangement, though representatives of foreign operators can apply in certain categories, such as bringing satellite capacity into India.

The authorisation then stays on a short lead. It cannot be transferred without IN-SPACe’s prior written approval, given in its sole discretion. Changes in management, control or shareholding must be reported within 48 hours, and a fresh authorisation is needed if control passes to a non-Indian entity. IN-SPACe may also impose a financial penalty on an operator that withdraws a service without notice or justification.

Chambers puts the process at around 75 to 120 days, depending on the activity, and says applicants are encouraged to apply six months ahead. Disputes under the authorisation go to mediation and then to three-member arbitration, seated in Ahmedabad.

Here is my concern, and it is a reasoned view. A body with no statutory base is issuing what looks like a licence, setting penalties and reserving sole discretion. In practice the operator accepts the terms by applying, so the arrangement works partly as a contract. That may hold up well for now. But I would want to see how it fares if a refused or revoked applicant challenges it in a High Court, and I have not found a reported case testing it.

Liability and insurance

India’s starting point is the treaty position. Chapter X of the NGP states that a launching State “may be exposed to unlimited liability for third-party damages”, whether the activity is governmental or private. We explain that exposure in our Liability Convention guide.

The NGP passes it down in three ways. A launch operator may have to carry third-party liability insurance, on terms set by IN-SPACe, with the Government of India added as an insured, and the insurance amount “capped at a value” IN-SPACe prescribes. Launch contracts with foreign customers must transfer third-party liability to the customer. And the applicant must indemnify IN-SPACe and the government against claims arising from the authorised activity.

As I read it, the insurance cap does not limit the operator’s own exposure. Chambers describes authorised entities as having “uncapped liability”, and says a separate government framework on third-party liability is in progress. Compare the US, where a government backstop can sit above the insurance, as we set out in our note on launch contracts. For an Indian start-up that gap is a real balance sheet issue.

Foreign money and foreign satellites

Foreign investment limits were eased by Press Note 1 of 2024, issued on 4 March 2024, and took legal effect on 16 April 2024 through amended non-debt instrument rules under the foreign exchange law. Under the automatic route, without government approval, investors may hold up to 74% in satellite manufacturing and operation, satellite data products and ground and user segments. The limit is 49% for launch vehicles, their associated systems and spaceports, and 100% for manufacturing components and systems for satellites and for the ground and user segments.

Foreign satellite capacity needs its own permission. Since 1 April 2025, only IN-SPACe authorised non-Indian satellites may provide capacity in India. Starlink is the example people know. It reportedly received a telecoms licence in mid-2025 and then IN-SPACe approval valid until July 2030. The authorisation is only one step, since telecom and broadcast use stay under the Department of Telecommunications and the broadcasting ministry. The general point is covered in our piece on satellite internet licensing.

Treaties, data and resources

Chambers lists India as a party to the Outer Space Treaty, the Rescue Agreement, the Liability Convention and the Registration Convention. It has signed the Moon Agreement but not ratified it. The NGP also lists the Artemis Accords, which India joined in 2023. Chambers notes that treaty obligations must be legislated before they are enforceable under the Indian Constitution, and that the NGP brings them in against authorised entities. That is a slightly awkward fit: Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty requires “authorization and continuing supervision”, and India provides it without a statute.

Two more rules are worth knowing. Remote sensing data with a ground sampling distance of 30 cm or finer needs IN-SPACe authorisation to disseminate. And the policy lets a private entity “possess, own, transport, use, and sell” an asteroid or space resource it recovers. That language puts India alongside the states in our asteroid mining guide, though a policy document is thinner support than a statute.

IN-SPACe keeps building. In June 2026 it issued separate norms for space situational awareness, to be read alongside the 2024 NGP.

What the bill may change

Goenka has said the bill would give IN-SPACe statutory powers and legal backing for authorisation. Press reports also linked it to more accessible insurance and lower penalties than earlier versions. One 2025 summary of press coverage mentions up to three years’ imprisonment and a Rs 1 crore fine for offences such as operating without a licence. On intellectual property, accounts conflict: that summary says rights created in space would belong to the government, while Chambers reports a redraft dropping that approach. I would not rely on either until there is a published text.

What I would watch

The first is the bill’s publication. A text would answer the question that matters most to investors, which is whether liability is capped or backed by the state.

The second is the third-party liability framework that Chambers says is under way. It could change the numbers for Indian launch companies before any Act passes.

The third is the first court challenge to an IN-SPACe decision. Foreign lawyers already know how a space dispute in India can run on for years, because of the Devas and Antrix saga. A statute with a clear appeal route would be worth more than any new policy.

Anuj KumarEditor-in-Chief

Anuj Kumar is the founder of Legal Desire Media and publishes Fashion Law Journal and Space Law Journal.

Space Law Journal is a joint initiative of Legal Desire Media and Odyogeek. Spotted something we got wrong, or want to respond? Write to space@legaldesire.com.