Platform Safexa Consent Safexa Discover The DPDP Act Readiness check Security & architecture Company Book a walkthrough
Reference

The DPDP Act,
obligation by obligation.

Written for the person who has to implement it. Exact sections, exact Rules, the maximum penalty attached to each, and an honest note on which part of Safexa addresses it — including where nothing does. Nothing here is legal advice; all of it is checkable against the bare Act and Rules.

Commencement

Three dates that matter.

The Act received assent in August 2023 but almost none of it commenced. The Rules, notified on 13 November 2025, set the actual clock — and it runs in three stages.

Time to 13 May 2027

From that date, notice, consent, Data Principal rights, security safeguards, breach reporting, retention and children's data are live and enforceable.


Maximum penalties
Security safeguards
₹250 cr
Breach notification
₹200 cr
Children's data
₹200 cr
SDF obligations
₹150 cr
Any other breach
₹50 cr
The obligations map

Twenty obligations, filtered how you need them.

Sections cite the Act; Rules cite the DPDP Rules, 2025. Penalties are the maxima in the Schedule — they are per contravention and cumulative.

Section / RuleWhat it requires Max penaltySafexa

Not exhaustive and not legal advice. It covers the obligations that fall on a Data Fiduciary in ordinary commercial processing; State processing under Section 17, exemptions under Section 7, and the Consent Manager regime under Rule 4 are out of scope here.

Three things the market keeps getting wrong

Worth checking your vendor on.

Common error
"We are a registered Consent Manager."

Nobody in India is. Registration under Rule 4 does not open until 13 November 2026, and the Board has to grant it. A Consent Manager is also a fundamentally different animal: accountable to the Data Principal rather than to you, required to run a consumer app, unable to read the data it brokers, and barred from simultaneously acting as your Data Processor.

Common error
"DPDP requires data localisation."

It does not. Section 16 is a negative-list regime — transfer is permitted except to countries the Central Government restricts. Localisation obligations are real, but they come from IRDAI, RBI and your own board policy. A vendor who cites DPDP for it has not read Section 16.

Common error
"Pseudonymised, so it is erased."

A keyed hash whose secret sits in the same system is pseudonymous, not anonymous — it remains personal data on a strict reading. Real erasure means destroying the key that can re-link the record. Ask any vendor what specifically they destroy, and where that key lives.

Bring us the question your counsel and your CTO disagree about.

Those are the conversations worth having before anyone signs anything.

Or email safexa@teknowxa.com directly — a person reads it.