Entrepreneurship in India has long been shackled by a legacy of red tape, but a bold new vision promises to set it free. Imagine a system where innovation thrives, not because of permission, but because of trust. This is the essence of the Jan Vishwas Siddhant, a transformative approach to deregulation that aims to dismantle the bureaucratic barriers stifling India’s entrepreneurial spirit. But here’s where it gets controversial: can a trust-based system truly replace decades of regulatory control without inviting chaos? Let’s dive in.
The journey from the Licence Raj to Jan Vishwas is a story of partial liberation. The 1991 economic reforms began to undo the damage caused by the state’s overreach in 1956, 1967, and 1976, but the job remains unfinished. True economic freedom isn’t about the absence of laws, but about laws that enable rather than hinder. The Jan Vishwas Siddhant seeks to address this by tackling six critical pathologies that act like regulatory cholesterol, clogging the arteries of India’s entrepreneurial ecosystem.
Pathology 1: The Permission Paradox. Growing up in Kashmir, I vividly remember my parents politely asking, “Ijaazat hai?” (Do we have permission?) before leaving a host’s home. But as a first-generation entrepreneur, I’ve spent 30 years grappling with the flip side: “Who allowed you to do this?” Innovation, by its very nature, defies permission, yet Indian entrepreneurs face a labyrinth of licenses, NOCs, and approvals—over 500 from central ministries and 3,200 from state bodies. This isn’t just bureaucratic hassle; it’s a constitutional contradiction, given that Article 19 guarantees the right to conduct business.
Pathology 2: The Instrument Explosion. Our Constitution envisions a simple regulatory framework: laws made by Parliament and rules by the executive. Yet, our administrative state has spawned a bewildering array of instruments—notifications, guidelines, circulars, and more—often unnotified and carrying penal sanctions. Entrepreneurs don’t read laws left to right; they navigate a right-to-left maze of compliances, 16 non-law instruments, rules, and Acts. With over 700 central and state Acts, the real burden lies in the estimated 12,000+ non-law instruments that dictate how businesses operate.
Pathology 3: The Compliance Blind Spot. Policymakers often focus on the substance of laws but lose sight of the cumulative compliance burden. By 2025, businesses faced over 69,000 compliances, a staggering number that stifles growth. The recent labor law reforms, which reduced compliance by 75%, are a step in the right direction, but this rationalization must be replicated across sectors. Compliance should target outcomes, not micromanage processes.
Pathology 4: Enforcing the Unenforceable. Noble intentions often lead to unenforceable laws, breeding corruption and inefficiency. Take the inspector tasked with checking 3.3 lakh weighing instruments—an impossible feat. The Jan Vishwas Siddhant advocates for realistic reforms: fewer laws, better enforcement, and performance management for civil servants. After all, the state should do less to achieve more.
Pathology 5: Process as Punishment. Jail provisions in laws are rarely enforced but often used as threats, clogging courts. The criminalization of cheque bouncing, for instance, has led to 43 lakh cases, accounting for 10% of court pendency. The Jan Vishwas Bill and labor codes recognize this, emphasizing proportional punishment and decriminalization of minor offenses. The goal? A fair system that doesn’t penalize the innocent.
Pathology 6: The Missing Single Source of Truth. Justice and transparency demand a unified database for all laws, rules, and guidelines. Entrepreneurs often fall prey to corruption because the “truth” is unverifiable or outdated. A live, comprehensive digital database like IndiaCode, integrated with the e-gazette, would ensure that no one is held accountable for obligations not listed.
The Jan Vishwas Siddhant is nothing short of revolutionary. It proposes perpetual self-registration for all licenses outside national security, public safety, health, and environment. Inspections would be random, risk-based, and third-party. Punishments would be proportionate, and regulatory changes would follow consultation with adequate transition time. Digitization would streamline filings, and an annual regulatory impact assessment would keep the system accountable.
But here’s the provocative question: Can India truly trust its entrepreneurs without the safety net of excessive regulation? Critics argue that deregulation could lead to exploitation or environmental harm. Proponents counter that trust, coupled with smart regulation, fosters innovation and prosperity. What’s your take?
India’s 6.3 crore enterprises, mostly dwarfs rather than giants, are a testament to the stifling effect of regulatory cholesterol. The Jan Vishwas Siddhant aims to change this, transforming subjects (praja) into citizens (nagrik) and ruling into governing. By freeing entrepreneurs from the ijaazat culture, it shifts the focus to koshish—effort. As poet Sohanlal Dwivedi aptly put it, “Those who keep trying never lose.”
The writer is co-founder, Teamlease Services. Let’s continue the conversation—do you think Jan Vishwas Siddhant is the key to unlocking India’s entrepreneurial potential, or is it a risky gamble? Share your thoughts below.
