India’s private 5G spectrum policy remains undecided, with operators resisting liberalisation. COAI argues that an operator-led model is the only solution for India’s unique industrial setup – while the rest of the market warns a failure to deliver urgent regulatory change could stifle industrial digitalisation and economic revitalisation.
In sum – what to know:
Demand review – government reviewing direct private 5G spectrum licensing amid operator opposition.
Lobbying letter – carrier alliance, COAI, wanted about the cost, security, revenue risks in bypassing telcos.
Crunch time – suppliers and commentators warn restrictive private 5G spectrum policy will curb Industry 4.0.
It seems likely that India will resist liberalising private 5G spectrum for enterprises to run their own infrastructure. Instead – if the lobbying works – the government appears inclined to stick with its current policy, to channel private 5G deployments via the country’s big mobile operators – to sub-let local tranches of expensively licensed public spectrum to enterprises, as suits. If so, the country’s industrial economy will suffer. So says a sampling of well-placed analysts and suppliers in the national Industry 4.0 sector.
We are all about to find out.
RCR Wireless has waited a week for the country’s top operators to respond to questions about their positions on private 5G spectrum, and… nada, zip, not a dicky bird. From any of them. And then, yesterday (August 11), the Cellular Operators Association of India (COAI), representing all of them, issued a strongly-worded statement to say India is a special case and should not copy the licensing regimes in other countries – even where they have worked, arguably, to make private 4G and 5G easily available for enterprises.
COAI is weighing into an ongoing review of private 5G spectrum. The government’s department of telecoms (DoT) has just finished (July 31) polling large enterprises in India to assess demand for directly-licensed spectrum for private 5G networks – in line with the mid-band spectrum carve-up in Europe, the US, and elsewhere. It invited firms with a “net-worth” of more than ₹100 Crores (somewhere north of about $11.5m) to respond to a ‘demand survey’ to register interest in licensing spectrum for ‘captive non-public networks’ (CNPNs; private 5G, by any other name).
Crunch time
The result is in the balance. “It is a crunch moment,” says Asad Khan, wireless research director at analyst firm SNS Telecom & IT. “All major operators oppose the move.” The new review follows recommendations by TRAI, the national regulator, in February (2025) for direct CNPN spectrum authorizations under Section 3 of the Telecoms Act 2023. “Together, these developments signal a possible shift from the existing operator-led model to a more open market, where vendors, integrators, and operators compete to deliver the most effective solutions at the best prices.”
Will it work? “It is too early to call, [but] I wouldn’t be surprised if there is a carve-out of either Band n79 (4.8-49 GHz) and n78 (3.7-3.8 GHz) mid-band spectrum, as well as Band n257 (28.5-29.5 GHz) mmWave spectrum,” he responds. The n78 provision will likely be for low-power indoor private 5G networks – to “protect incumbent satellite C-Band receive stations operating in the range”, he says. But such a view seems optimistic, maybe. Asked the same question, one network vendor, on the condition of anonymity, remarks: “We hope so, but it is a long shot.”
They add: “[But] the difference now is that they [the government regulator] have the proof that the mobile operators are not serious about it – hence it will be harder for them to push back.” So – in the balance then, like we said. But the country’s big mobile operators, silent with RCR, are not about to cave. The COAI statement, included in full in a previous article, says claims that industrial enterprises are better off with their own spectrum are “misleading” on the grounds they mostly exist in urban environments, where operators are rolling out public 5G at some pace.
“Direct spectrum allocation to enterprises is not tenable in India because of various reasons pertaining to India’s telecom ecosystem, the national revenue, as well as security architecture. While some industry bodies have, in their own interests, drawn parallels with countries such as the US, Finland, Germany, UK, etc… [they] ignore a crucial contextual difference [where their] industries [are] located in remote or geographically secluded areas…. In India, most industrial corridors and enterprise zones are well-served by operators, thereby leaving no coverage deficit.”
This is the COAI kick-off argument, signed-off by S.P. Kochhar, director general at the group. Kochhar goes on to argue that direct spectrum allocation in India is impractical and risky, and private 5G would be costlier, harder to manage, and require constant upgrades that operators are better able to handle. It also argues that private 5G could cause interference, reduce government revenue, create an uneven playing field, and pose serious national security risks – and therefore that all enterprise 5G needs should be met by operators via spectrum leasing or network slicing.
Failed model
These appear like reasonable arguments, but the carrier model is not working – says everyone else. What is the opportunity? Where does India rank for private 5G sales? “It is low… And it is not just low, but very, very low – versus the potential. Nobody else has cracked it either. We have partnered with operators and integrators… and, so far, none have delivered.” This is our vendor source, again; there are others, too, who say the same. “India will miss the boat on industrial digitalisation, and the whole made-in-India movement – if regulation isn’t fixed soon,” says another.
The terms for the response are the same: anonymity, rather like in the early days of private 5G (4G LTE), when the budding supplier ecosystem was afraid to upset its traditional operator channels. The explanation goes on: “[India needs] regulation similar to Germany and US, and elsewhere – at least 20MHz, if not more, should be allowed in the usual n78 band for integrators with very light or no restrictions.” It is way overdue – a decision, at least; whether to break out a chunk of the mid-band for enterprises, or to somehow compel the carrier set to be more progressive.
The demand is there, and so is the growth – if TRAI can just stimulate the market with a clear directive. India-based Tech Mahindra, one of the more active integrators in the space, quotes Grand View Research, that the private 5G market India will be worth $674.6 million in revenue terms by 2030, up from $30.6 million in 2023 – a 20-times jump for kit sales of various kinds. Amol Phadke, chief transformation officer at Tech Mahindra, says: “This growth is driven by the rapid expansion of 5G networks and the strong commitment to 5G deployment by leading operators.”
Note the message about public-5G rollout. Tech Mahindra is close to the carriers in India. “[We are] collaborating with the largest enterprises and MNOs to deploy 5G networks across India.” Phadke cites work with Airtel, notably, to deliver “private 5G use cases” in automotive manufacturing (“real-time analytics and connected robotics”). He also references a private 5G setup at the Chakan plant (“India’s first 5G-enabled auto manufacturing unit”) for Mahindra Auto, part of the same group, as well as work with Rakuten Symphony, Cisco, and Airspan Networks on open RAN.
Tech Mahindra has international deployments, too – with an unnamed car maker in Germany (“edge AI and digital twins”) and an unnamed logistics provider in the US (“real-time tracking and automation”). Phadke explains: “Currently, Indian enterprises must get spectrum through mobile operators. While this isn’t inherently problematic, the situation is more complex. Operators possess significant expertise and experience in deploying spectrum on a national scale, making them the primary channel for this deployment.” All of which chimes with the COAI message.
Last chance
But Phadke says enough to think Tech Mahindra sees the upside in looser regulation. He says: “Industries that require rapid deployment, such as manufacturing or those handling mission-critical applications, may prefer to have direct control over their spectrum… India holds immense potential for private 5G due to its large manufacturing base, increasing digital adoption, and the government’s push for self-reliance in industrial tech. However, the regulatory landscape is still evolving. [The current model] can limit flexibility and innovation for some enterprise cases.”
He adds: “Adoption is expected to accelerate as regulatory clarity improves, and more businesses realize the return on investment from digital transformation… As regulations evolve, we are committed to remaining adaptable and will work within the new framework… India ranks among the top global markets with strong potential for private 5G… With the right regulator support aligned to industry requirements, we expect India to emerge as one of the most dynamic private 5G markets by 2027.” The firm is also targeting healthcare and agriculture, he said.
The message, very clearly, is that India has huge potential. State-owned operator Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) has been particularly active, it seems; recent projects include the country’s first private 5G setup in the oil refinery sector (for Numaligarh Refinery Limited, a division of state-owned Oil India Limited), and its biggest by far in the national coal industry (for Coal India Limited, the largest government-owned coal producer in the world). The latter was delivered by local private cellular startup Tidal Wave, using its own kit and BSNL spectrum.
Khan at SNS Telecom & IT lists other private 5G deployments in India: with Bosch, L&T Heavy Engineering, Kirloskar Group, Sundaram Clayton Limited (SCL), National Capital Region Transport Corporation (NCRTC), the Ministry of Home Affairs. He says: “India has a relatively nascent private 5G market for a country of its size. We track less than 100 entries in our database of private network engagements, and less than a quarter are based on 5G… We track twice as many in Brazil – another developing market, but with a very liberal approach to spectrum availability.”
The latter double-count in Brazil mixes private 5G deployments using both operator-owned spectrum (like India) and Limited Private Service (SLP) licenses (like in the US, much of Europe, and elsewhere). For Tidal Wave, involved with BSNL in the above-mentioned Coal India case, the draw is plain. “Private 5G is not an optional tech,” says Ankit Dixit, chief executive at the firm. His firm is competing against the big beasts of telecoms in its home market, but it is racking up the orders: three live deployments, 10 trial deployments, plus a couple of projects outside of India.
It is targeting the mining, manufacturing, and defense sectors. Dixit reasons:“For reliable connectivity that provides autonomy in mission-critical industries, private 5G is the only viable option. We see a significant and growing opportunity in India – driven by rising demand for secure and reliable dedicated-connectivity in industrial environments.” Who are the leading integrators and operators? “It depends on the industry and region. The best integrators have strong domain expertise; the best operators have a forward-thinking approach to spectrum sharing.”
Bigger market
What about our vendor sceptic? “The demand is there, even if it is lower than in other markets. But India is still very competitive so efficiency priority is lower, and it is not so green so sustainability needs are lower; worker safety is lower, too… but all of this is offset by the size of the country and the number of Industry 4.0 segments… We hope there is a change – to finally wake the market up. Because the operators have not done very much. It is like they signed some deals after lobbying to show they can do it, but were never very motivated.”
They add: “But the whole industry has seen how the release of vertical spectrum does not just give a boost to direct deployments but also to indirect ones, as mobile operators are forced to become active – or else be left out.”
