 So we are on to another session with regard to drones and today we have with us Anirudh who has been an active member of framing the regulation and is part of the policy making in terms of giving information or feedback to the authorities. So we have Anirudh and Anirudh is the founder of Ikegai law and Anirudh I would like you to introduce yourself. Thanks Kishore, thanks for that. Hi everyone. So I am the founder of Ikegai law which is a law in public policy firm largely focused on the technology industry. So we do a fair bit of legal and public policy advisory around all things tech but I think our forte is really emerging technology and we've been fairly engaged with novel tech areas like blockchain, aerospace, drones, etc. I think it was really our engagement with the aerospace industry that got us involved early on with the drones industry. Been active in the space ever since the circular landed on our desk since 2014 which basically shook up things for the industry and we had an interesting role to play in the formulation of the car as it stands today in the sense that a fair number of our comments were actually introduced in that piece of regulation as well. Alongside being the councillors to the drone migration of India and a large part of the industry so that's really been the involvement in the space and yeah, happy to have this conversation. Fantastic, I think since you have been very much involved in the policy making and this thing I think I would like to one first start with you being able to give an introduction of the state that it was before what led us to the policy making, why we had to get to do that and what has been the impact of that policy so it's more like a story on where we came from and why how we got here. Sure, it is a fairly long story. A brief introduction. Sure, sure. Yeah, like me, I mean, so essentially I think there are distinct three phases to the way the regulators have or the policy for drones have evolved essentially. There was a time pre-2014 when there was really no explicit regulation for the drone industry. So you have the DGCA which is primarily tasked with the job of regulating manned aviation and all regulations, the various cars that exist today except for the one that now governs drones. Everything else was largely targeted at regulating the manned aviation industry. So if you were to ask me pre-2014 as a lawyer, if you were to come to me and say, hey, can I undertake this kind of drone operation, we would actually look at the various regulations or guidelines available for manned aviation and try to apply those to the drone industry as well. And that is, and I think in 2014 what began to happen was there were, I think that was the year when a lot of new activity or drone activity generally started to make a favorite of buzz in the media as well. So if you recall, Amazon actually announced that they were going to start home delivery by Diwali or there was news by a pigs area and Bombay trying to you don't want to deliver pizzas etc. I think all of the suddenly shook up the DGCA into action and this is something that I've seen not only in drones but in blockchain and cryptocurrency where we work quite extensively and many other novel technology tech industries that when the regulator does not exactly know how to regulate because it's so new, it essentially adopts one of two regulatory approaches. One is that either you just take quiet and let the industry evolve and you wait and watch and see how other countries are evolving their regulations and apply it or the other is you go ahead and ban it, pull the entire industry down and so that at least you are covered. I mean if anything were to go around tomorrow it's not on you and then again we can watch, see how other countries are evolving their jurisprudence on this and the DGCA much like we see many other regulators, I think the DGCA also chose the latter which is to put out the circular in October 14 which essentially said well it actually did not ban drone activity, it asked for an approval but it made the process so hard that it was a de facto ban. So in fact it's very, so that's one phase you know from absolutely no regulation to the 2014 when you had the circular and I can of course talk in length about so I have some very interesting tidbits about you know the fallout of the circular etc but that was phase number two and then phase number three was I think for the longest time the circular remained in place and there was absolutely I mean while drone activity continued there was very little regulatory kind of there were no approvals really that were granted as for the circular and then you know it kind of came to a point where while there was generally pressure on the DGCA and the MOCA to put in place some regulations from various arms of the government but there was really very little consensus between the different governmental agencies on what that regulation should look like because of which there was no movement for the longest time that in fact R1.0 came in after many, many iterations, many years and ultimately what happened was that this regulatory tussle between the different agencies of the government became so kind of amplified that I think it led to the third phase where you saw the DGCA and MOCA really put their weight behind the sector and you know kind do some very quick policy making and ultimately that led to the R1.0 and Digital Sky and I would say that you know it was an interesting idea for its time but clearly it has not played out very well like it is exactly grounded the industry in open intended and so we are we are where we are right now but I think it's interesting it would be interesting to kind of study each of these phases and see why one led to the other and what has to the place we are in but yeah that's that's how I see it. So I think that's quite interesting in understanding this because one among the things that happens in the drone industry at least in India is that a lot of the initial drone people came into the industry basically from a background of aeromodelling. Subsequently it is basically it's a lot of information I mean a lot of projects that have been you know open source projects which have probably made them enthusiastic and then get into the drone activity but initially the first drone people were all people from the aeromodelling industry. Was there any regulation to begin with for the aeromodelling community in the earlier days you know aeromodelling was always a niche of the NCC and they probably had the regulation but out of the NCC then what was the regulation and was it chaos back then as well? Sure so I haven't studied the aeromodelling kind of industry so much really but my understanding is that there is a very slim set of guidelines for the aeromodelling industry but it largely was you know in a state of self-regulation of sorts because you know you have these clubs which would ensure that things are done the right way but I'm really no authority to speak about the aeromodelling industry as it existed before the drone industry. So my own understanding since I was an aeromodeller before coming into the area of drones so in the initial days it was very much self-regulatory as you said we had absolutely no control from an authority on us to say that this is what you can do and this is what you cannot do you know so it was all among us between us that we would think what is safe and what is not safe there was no regulation to the best of my understanding these were younger days when probably we would not have understood the you know impacts of going against the law so we never even cared for it in a way that that's how we did aeromodelling so and as we did it we flew in places where we probably were not authorized because it was a dried out lake so these are the kind of activities that we did as aeromodelling however safety was only ensured by as a community we people you know watch over each other and that's how we ensured safety in many ways and scold someone who does something which is you know funny or not supposed to be done these are the kind of ways we actually did it so we were not aware of any kind of a law or you know mandate on which we were to fly how to fly any no rules of any of these kinds I and I also tend to think that because of the lack of such kind of a regulation and that stage in the in the early stage the same thing started trickling down into the drone activity and that's where the problem starts so I this here's another part that I want to this thing so when we did aeromodelling it was more for fun drone became a business so the regulation came to control a business rather than the entertainment the fun activity of it can you talk about what is the impact of all of these regulation that has had on the you know the entertainment and the fun aspect of aeromodelling and I will also say more than fun there I mean I'll follow it up with saying that the innovation that came into the drone also came in from the aeromodelling guys so I'd like to extend it to that as well subsequently no absolutely I think in fact you mentioned about going to these guide up lakes to fly or model planes it is unfortunate that even today I know manufacturers drone manufacturers who have no choice but to test out their their drones that they're building prototyping act at these you know guide up lakes where there's very little chance of a police personnel to catch hold of you you know so so things have unfortunately not changed too much see the you're absolutely right so entertain while aeromodelling was always you know was was was the entertainment first but I think even our regulations of the law recognize the the the the impact of aeromodelling or the positive impact of aeromodelling in new innovation for the aviation industry so you actually had this this car which was which was later on suspended you know which which actually provided for experimental aviation and it actually allowed you know small small scale activity for experimental flying and and it you know essentially recognized in fact if I'm not wrong the very preamble of that car actually recognized that aeromodelling is a you know has like has the spillover benefit so I I certainly agree with you and likewise and for that reason even I remember that when we were when we were engaging with the regulators the BGC in particular for drone regulations we always you know kind of we separately make representations for the aeromodelling community as well that just like the spillover benefits of aeromodelling in manned aviation there is there's also you know I think even in the drone industry or the drone regulations should recognize that and provide for provide for you know a lower level of regulation or regulatory you know supervision on the aeromodelling community so I fully agree with you on that now having said that unfortunately the the very the the entertainment value of drones I think has also led to some of the the prejudices that crept into the regulatory system against drone so for a long for a very long time actually the regulators did not take the drone industry very seriously for the reason that they that I mean I think this is and I I based this on the on a number of conversations I've had with the regulators that you know what is this I mean ultimately these are toys our primary responsibility is manned aviation where the lives of hundreds of people are at stake every single time an airplane takes off so why are you you know wasting our time over something which which is which is largely just you know a teenager's kind of a toy for a teenager so I think that prejudice also did a fair bit of harm you know but yes that's that's my that's my take on it took I took a fair while for everybody to realize that there is a lot more that is that can be done with drones I mean in fact in fact the future of the industry hinges on efficient and effective use of drones I mean going forward five years ten years I think the efficiency of Indian industry you can't you can't I mean you cannot compete with the world with the global industry if you do not have an effective drone industry supporting but how would you say that you can differentiate between the the entertainment or the hobbies kind of activity from the commercial or the activity that needs regulations how do you think the separation is done and how do you think it can be affected on the ground so I don't actually want to make that distinction all I'm saying is that the regulator had make that artificial distinction and had some inherent bias but but the way that distinction is kind of is carried through is one in in terms of size and weight like the weight categorization of drones so necessarily when you when you have very limited regulation around the use of nano drones and a big use case of nano drones is actually entertainment you know those are indirectly kind of even though the guidelines do not specifically allow or disallow any kind of entertainment that they could use but but the weight categorization of course you know allows you to carry on some basic entertainment kind of use cases without without much restriction so I think that's how it gets taken care of okay so there's another part of the question that came in why see the ban the effective ban came in October 7th of 2014 and it took some time till 18 December to actually get the first regulation out what prompted them to introduce the ban so early on and then have the regulation start working on was there any particular case or certain reason for them to actually impose a you know this ban suddenly on the October 7th of 2014 yeah as I said earlier sir there was a fair bit of news that the media was a buzz with some of these announcements by various companies and other you know where you know everybody was getting quite excited about the use of drones for all kinds of things and I'm pretty sure that there must have been I mean all of that woke up the the VGCA to act but but as I mentioned earlier the reason for the ban to me simply simply is it's a very convenient trajectory approach like if I don't know how to regulate I'm safer banning you if I know exactly what because because if I do choose to issue guidelines as they have done today and somebody flies in a compliant manner but yet crashes killing somebody right then it is on the questions will also be raised you know fingers will be pointed at the regulator as well right so so I think it's a very convenient regulatory approach to ban something that you are not completely sure of and then we can watch as to how the US is regulating how the EU is regulating and adopt those policies over the period of time now the VGCA also is it's my belief that they they thought that you know and and listen this is true for even the manned aviation industry in India most of our almost every bit of our you know regulations that the one manned aviation have been borrowed from from other jurisdiction it is just not in our DNA to kind of evolve new guidelines and I'm not necessarily using that to make a point I mean I'm just saying that's that's historically that's been the case and the VGCA would have expected that it will play out in the very same manner for the drones industry as well allow these other countries to regulate to experiment with regulations that we will adopt however things being quite layout like that and then finally you know because because the US also came up with for example US and EU came up with these experimental licenses and limited scope licenses etc but not really a full-fledged regulatory guidance and so we we can't really find anything I mean the VGCA continue to play it very safe basically now what happened I think over a period of time is that there was obviously the demand from the drone industry and from the regular industry for allowing drone operations and there was a pressure was building up on the VGCA to a point when this started then this first mooted the idea that we will now why don't we why don't we come up with some kind of regulation and we involve different governmental agencies to to weigh in on this now drones necessarily are a subject area which which are not the sole which which do which do involve multiple governmental agencies right so whether it is the defense the Air Force the airport's authority the MHA you know the wireless planning commission from our telecom and spectrum perspective so there are just so many different agencies that are at play right and when the VGCA was finally able to involve all of these people and bring them in the same room to kind of brainstorm on what this policy should look like they were not able to achieve consensus for the longest time in fact it went from back to worse over the period of time where you know and primarily I mean it was why the VGCA was concerned from a safety perspective the MHA was concerned from a security perspective the defense also had similar issues and and these these are all opposing interests it went and and nobody could could agree to a minimum baseline standard that could satisfy everybody in fact it went to an extent where at some point the MHA actually introduced a draft bill to govern drone operations which was their own bill which is shocking because really if you think about it the MHA is not the appropriate regulator for drone activity it is it's got to be the the VGCA and this MHA bill proposed bill did not even name the VGCA so that was the extent to which the regulators were opposed and had had a difference in opinion so I think this was you know it kind of became very very complex it was a very complex issue to navigate through so that's something that you brought up which is quite interesting to actually know because it was an open knowledge information that you know there was this conflict between DGCA and MHA in terms of MHA trusting the responsibility on DGCA when they didn't want to take the responsibility you know it's something like that and but I wasn't at all aware of this bill that was you know put up in the context over here and last thing with regard to the history I mean this is my own perception but 2014 and just the preceding year to that was I in my opinion the rise of the open source software of drones and all of those contributed to actually making it easily accessible and a lot of hobbies actually starting getting into drones and probably this I mean causing harm or potentially could cause harm so that was when the riser and the ban on drones actually came up do you have anything to say about that? No sorry I'm sorry I can quite follow the question if you could just tell So what I'm trying to say is 2014 and the year before that is probably when the maximum work on open source drones and the software you know because the earlier arrow modeling was about craft work you know it really had to do apart it had to deal with the skills of the person so you didn't have the number of people participating in the particular in the hobby as much as when the drones started to be a transfer when multi rotors became the norm and the skill transferred from everything in mechanical hobby you know craft work to electronics and software development all of these being available components for people to just simply download it didn't really require them to build on any skills you know you just you know pick out components from the local shop and then you just make a software and then you fly the skill was not developed but you already had the tools you already were a player in the market you know You're asking if that had anything to do with the ban? Yes that's an interesting thought I don't think so I mean or maybe actually indirectly so because as I said there was an increase in activity see thankfully India hasn't really seen any kind of or in fact globally the industry hasn't seen any kind of accidents so to say right which if because if you have one major accident incident where say there's a crash or you know some kind of a incident with a manned aircraft or something I think that will just completely change the way regulators think about the regulation it will give the regulations a very different shape so thankfully we've not had that and we definitely can't have that up until 2014 so I mean my thinking is that it was largely the kind of you know the announcements that were made in that year about all this new drone based drone activity and maybe the reason for that is actually what you're saying which is like you know because now there was a sudden spot and you know just about anybody who had a certain bank of mine could go and create their own drones and then start doing these kind of experiments got the BGCA kind of worked up about this that's possible but I'm not too sure about that okay so okay that's for the past of how we got here and what is now the current regulation how is it actually playing out how is it how effective has it been what is your comments on that no so the regulations having been having been effective at all because they've obviously not failed to achieve what we what they set out to achieve which is a promising drone industry for the country right so in fact it is interesting that the drone activity in the country has actually fallen down has reduced after the policy came into play right so because prior to the prior to the announcement for digital sky at least there was a fair bit of ambiguity owing to which on account of which people were able to carry out certain operations now if you go to the DGCA for a license the simple answer is well you know apply apply for a license pursuing to the policy and you really can't because that policy requires a functional digital sky for you to get a license so that's so obviously that's not happening so the policy has has done us more harm than good in and I and I think while the the digital sky as an idea was unprecedented for its time it's a beautiful idea right you are basically giving a license not to a human being but directly to the machine itself to make sure that if it is unlicensed doesn't fly and you have complete control over the operation as and that's that's phenomenal for any regulator now while the idea itself was great it was a little too ahead of its times and and overly ambitious because in the in the time to come they have not been able to build out the technological backbone that is necessary to deploy this and that is resulted in the kind of the situation that we are in right now so the policy hasn't worked and what is unfortunate is that we've also not acted fast enough or done done anything at all to really circumvent the failings of that policy right so I think it's been enough time for us to realize what's not working and then figure out other ways to solve for it but we are still trying to fix the you know kind of instead of undoing what people can place and and coming up with a new structure we're still trying to gradually fixing you know the digital sky system which will which is going to take its own time I think we're still very far away from implementing a worthable digital sky model like now so say six it's bad news in 2018 December is when the car came out and 2019 january is when there was an announcement again for fair car 2.0 draft and that which introduces bvlo as beyond visual line of sight operations which basically is the basis for enabling delivery systems so and I think there was an expression of interest that came out sometime a few months after january maybe march april sometime last year and so so what is the current status with regard to delivery and its legality and where are we what is the current position with DC so other today bvlo's operations are not permitted under the car as it exists the only operation the tests that are being done are being done by a certain certain set of selected certain companies that can be selected to to carry out these operations and these licenses are directly being given by the vgca so it's still very experimental and we are far off from having some kind of solid regulatory framework that enables bvlo's operations but let's be real we are far off even from having regular course operations pursuant to the policy so you know I'm very circumspect of any kind of bold announcements that that are made these days by the bgca because if you're saying that well this is really no point in having these kind of you know in kind of expending energy on experiments for which are five years you know which may may may see the day of the life of the day five years hence but when they're not not even working on solving the the basic four problems for the industry in fact I would I would say that bvlo's operations could have been permitted even at car one there were enough conversations around the feasibility of bvlo's operations and I think very limited scope bvlo's operations not not that you allow anybody and everybody to start doing beyond visual line of sight but but for certain categories of operators for certain kinds of induced cases we could have permitted bvlo's even even then and because necessarily could do so because I think any drone policy that does not enable bvlo's operations is short-sighted you really can't have meaningful drone operations without you know because if if I have to operate only within visual line of sight maybe I don't even know unique drones I mean no I mean yes they they add incremental efficiency but but the true potential of drones can can only be met if if you allow beyond visual line of sight so that's one thing I can do tell you that at the point in time when car one was issued the industry was happy with whatever little was given to them and the regulators were also convinced because it was for everybody including the regulators it was so frustrating it was a frustrating two years to finally make progress to you know to a point where you see a document you know is at the final car at that point everybody had given up and they were just happy with whatever was and the consensus was like let's just release something start some basic activity and then you know over the period of time we'll keep iterating on the on the policy but that has definitely not happened because we couldn't we couldn't even have your basic set of operations permitted on the basis of car one I think yeah that's a quite I don't know it's quite a difficult proposition because I think once policy has come out it's going to be for various reasons very difficult to roll back on any part of it you know so it's it's sometimes better to be conservative to begin with than to put an ambitious one and roll back which wouldn't happen so I don't know how that's going to actually play out there's of course then comes the other part I think Zomato is one among the people who's began they were reports on their you know doing the deliveries based on using drones so what is what is the kind of activity that's been happening with regard to delivery and the testing currently yeah so see I mean I can't talk as to the specifics of you know what individual players are on what stage they are at right now but I can say that delivery is certainly shaping up certainly shaping up in an interesting way firstly at the point at the time when car one was issued the I think the DGCA or the other regulators could not either either sadden even sadden the possibility of delivery so delivery was specifically carved out of the car and not allowed at that point and nobody was even seizes about I mean the regulators are not even seriously considering the possibility but now that we actually have licenses being given for testing etc I think the the regulatory mindset has evolved to the extreme where they're open to the possibility where they are you know happy for the industry to try try this out as well I think in parallel the industry is also evolved a fair bit the technology has evolved in fact you know a couple of things are happening now one is that the tech itself so there's a number of patents that have been filed for drones and use of drones for delivery in fact Amazon has some very interesting packings of lake which which you can allow you know just just to control drone operations where where the recipient can actually give instructions and stuff like that so that's one interesting thing the other is also there are various business models which are being tried out to enable delivery so for instance we are not saying that you deliver directly to the end consumer at their house because that obviously creates a lot of challenges but can we have mobile ports that can that can move around the city or maybe hubs within the city where you can have a drone deliver and then you build a delivery model from that hub to the end consumer so a bunch of different things are being tried out and and the regulator seems to be playing ball to a certain extent which is which is great okay and that's quite interesting actually what they're doing lastly with regard to delivery as we understand it delivery as since you as you said is not legal in car 1.0 it's not part of the scope of car 1.0 then came the whole thing about farm spraying of pesticide and other things in for agricultural applications and by the wording of the car it is it becomes a part under the delivery which is prohibited because nothing should separate from the aircraft is the definition of what delivery is all about and so it becomes an illegal activity to actually do spraying however there is an I think there's an associated document not part of the policy document which allows you to do spraying only for a farmer so but yet we are now seeing all of these you know during the covid we are having spraying in the city being done and all that using drones you know the spray of disinfectant using drones so it's strictly speaking not legal but what are your comments and how was how is DGCA trying to address these kind of no I think even the even the the DGCA FAQs actually speak about use of RPS for agricultural UABs for agricultural purpose and clearly say that you know you cannot use these for any purpose for spraying of pesticides I think I the DGCA's view is also the same but having said that there are players in the industry who are offering that solution but together it will be it will have to be you know I think you will you'll need it to be specifically cleared by the DGCA I mean you will need specific clearance for anything but but pesticides is currently I think the DGCA's view is also the same okay so I think that kind of complicates it because it needs finally the whole drone policy is there to facilitate and make sure that everybody are on a common framework to actually facilitate the use cases and as you said beyond visual line of sight not being a part of the car is effectively not making the drone industry progress actually because that's a great limitation the purpose of drones is really for you know going beyond visual line of sight and automating and without the human presence and all of that I I do agree that it will take its time so maybe we'll just have to wait for the whole thing to play out over that so there's a question by Sandeepan from Tropogo and he is looking at drone insurance the car 1.0 mandates that there is third party liability insurance which is you know requirement for any operator on operations but so this is not being actually followed and I believe that Sandeepan is he's into the business of trying to give insurance but nobody is actually taking insurance I I remember the problem before was that nobody was offering insurance even though we wanted to take insurance so you want to talk about the insurance the problem of the insurance it's a chicken next story as I understand it chicken the next story I think Sandeepan you're not alone there are a couple of other insurers that are and brokerage houses that are looking at this issue and attempting to launch products for drone operations the why are we not seeing compliance I think we are not seeing compliance at any level right obviously the moment you fly a drone today you are very likely not compliant to begin with so so if I'm anyway going to fly without compliance you know should I further spend money on it and and secure an insurance policy I don't know but I think the biggest market for insurance in the immediate or the crimes to be in the short run will be the commercial use case so to the extent that you know there is and my come on I'm largely industrial use case for example where where say the government or the or the or the large corporate or an industry is is is giving an operator or an order to fly drones in experiences or operate drones for it's for it's in the news they will probably in the contract want to make a insurance well they will one they will make a compliance with the car and second in the contract itself and they would make a insurance as well I think and that would be and I think because of which operators will definitely consider and be willing to spend money on insurance so I think that's the opportunity your typical kind of wedding photographer or your typical you know your regular small scale commercial activity is not going to be I don't think that industry is going to take on to insurance immediately unless we see a stricter enforcement of of the car itself. Yeah I think I'd agree with that because it's a struggling industry and I think more or less going to avoid everything that can be avoided here anyway breaking the law you're just let's break one more law so there's another question by Shashank Srinivasan his question is under what legal framework are various state agencies using drones for surveillance so is there any kind of you know authority or a policy by which they're actually given the permissions to do what they're doing you know so and if if they're not then what is the kind of records that as a as a citizen we have you've seen during this COVID itself you've seen a lot of police very much putting up videos on Twitter and other places of them chasing down people on you know playing caram under a tree and I have seen a few more videos you know like of those kind so what is the legal sanctity of it and we all understand it as an accepted because it's an emergency situation everything is like you know it's accepted over there but this is the abnormal situation which should not become the normal so sure so under the car there is actually there is no provision that requires a government agency or exempts a government agency from taking permission I think in fact there is if you just give me a second there is yeah no so then they do talk about some some kind of notification requirements etc but for the longest time what we've seen in practice is that the a lot of government agencies and police for instance don't don't go through the BGCA when they're sanctioning any any kind of operations it is public sector undertakings I've seen that they definitely do but but a lot of other government agencies and the police etc in particular do not necessarily go to the ground at all for various reasons one for the longest time there was actually ambiguity under the under the law itself or whether that is required no separate guidelines have been issued by the BGCA on the subject and then eventually you know also there was you know because ultimately it's for the local police to enforce so you know they somehow probably feel that they are any which were not subject to that requirement but see in the current time at least what is happening is that the the BGCA has not come out with any kind of clarifications for this for use of drones around during the lockdown like and that I think is inaction which cannot be which which I find very hard to justify so obviously what is happening is that you know instead of all these agencies instead of going to the BGCA which nobody knows how long it's going to take there's no such procedures and no such guidelines people are you know so these the governments and the agencies are just going ahead and doing undertaking these these operations and while while I think the very proper technical technically correct way of doing of carrying out any operations would be for even the government the state government the police etc etc who take prior approval of the BGCA I have sympathy with anybody who chooses not to because because honestly I don't think you were really here back in time and and I would have expected the BGCA to have so it's not that the BGCA is not not aware of the situation right one would have expected that they take action on their own come out with some fast track approval process or just give clarification as to what for what purposes what agencies can fly right now or not like nothing of that sort has been done yeah which is unfortunate because right now we don't even have manned flights so there's actually ample amount of time at hand and it's far safer because there are hardly any manned flights it's far safer as well there are also not you also don't have the kind of traffic on the road you don't have people on the road so you know the chances of any kind of collateral damage are reduced significantly now that is as good a time I mean it's a good time for for us to really deploy drones effectively and yeah but that's that's how it is uh so Sandipan has a follow-up question to the insurance problem and he's basically asking a question which is saying that when you're non-compliant that's fine for I mean civil work or commercial activity but when you're taking up a government tender then you will have to do a compliance for all of the requirements that are there as per the policy and the same thing even is for other aspects not just insurance like including NPNT and all as of now as you said NPNT is the backbone of it is still not ready but you tenders still ask for NPNT compliance as part of their you know delivery as part of the tender requirements so how do you how does one actually justify tender and quote I mean applying for a tender today sure I mean I think the only way to do that is secure the tender and then apply for approvals but and to that extent I think even if it's a government tender obviously then the relevant government agency also helps you out to a certain extent but but that's really the only way you have to comply and compliance will require you to get a special exemption or a permission from the from the DECA so I think the way to go about securing the tender then applying alongside the awarding agency to the DECA so that basically means that there's a opportunity for you Sandeep there are tenders that are coming around and they need insurance and you should be going behind them for that so yeah but there are not too many tenders which so one there are not too many tenders because you know everybody realizes it's hard it's it's difficult to comply so even you know you're not seeing as much activity generally but also when the tenders do come through there is a fair bit of you know I can actually not not in every case are you able to really put things into motion because you may not secure the relevant approvals or whatnot so it is it is quite difficult which means that some things are pardoned non-compliance is pardoned in some way once you get the tender no I'm not saying that I'm saying that you may get the tender and skill not get the approval so while you have the tender you may not be able to fly irrespective okay but still activity goes on no not necessary I mean for typically for government I mean I would assume that if an activity is being tendered out I'm assuming that whatever activity is being carried out is being done pursuing to approval from the DGCA at least they haven't made that assumption I don't know if that that too is being contributing there is definitely activity by various government agencies where they are choosing to ignore the DGCA approval requirement that's a different thing but the moment you put things out by way of a tender usually you will see that there are you know governance in the tender saying that well the operator has to secure permission and obviously I mean typically agencies are not yeah so so I do know I mean there are multiple scenarios where say the MHA is using or the PMO is using drones for various reasons and they are they are clearly able to get you know they are able to secure approvals on a fast track basis from the you know if required so we see we are seeing both kinds of situations but during the lockdown at least I think most of the activity is without approval because nobody is wasting time reaching out to you know an office in Delhi trying to trying to you know secure secure license yeah I think the whole process of getting the approval from DGCA itself is you know mind-boggling I mean there was large the floods last year and when we were we were one among the people trying to help out during the floods using drones over there and it was at some point in time there was a sudden you know backlash from the certain administrative people who basically said that you know you know this drone activity at this time will require us to get permission from DGCA and at that time it was a requirement that you actually submit it in writing and the whole process would take a minimum of seven days for the approval to come back to you to do that and this is an emergency we need you to deploy in the next one and a half hours that's the kind of situation that was there and those are the times when they have actually chosen to at least in my this thing they've chosen to actually ignore the you know policy and actually go ahead with taking a certain amount of risk so isn't it necessary that the policy actually takes care of such kind of a situation and actually allows people to do you know emergency activity it absolutely is and I would say the policy actually allows for it also the policy allows for exemptions okay like you know the the DGCA is not really acting on see because what happens is that any kind of exemption requires you to basically means that you're applying your discretion and which also means that you the regulator are also taking a certain risk on what you permit right so it is it is convenient for the regulator to just go by the rule book and not exercise its discretion and not expose itself to risk and they've chosen to chosen a convenient path through and through which shouldn't be the case point is like the policy allows you to do it but the regulator has not been acting so yeah in this particular case it was the person on the ground who chose to ignore and basically take the himself should there have been inquiry or anything like that it would be his neck on the line you know so I would say that you know in times like these if there is action eventually the the the odds of action are lower and if there is action the odds of penalty are lower because you know any any such action will also be meeting out in the context of you know nobody can be lying to the situation in which you're acting and the reason for which you're acting you're not doing this to do some coming some kind of illegality you know and the emergent nature the the the the scope of the emergency the need for quick action etc will all be taken into account I guess the problem is when in doing such this kind of you know such this kind of pro bono activity if something were to go wrong if there was an accident in that you know kind of while while you're doing this kind of an activity then I think it could definitely become could be very problematic for you but for the for the most part otherwise I think that you know I would be a little little less worried about action and penalty in these kind of emergency in kind of emergency as as opposed to normal times I agree with you I would just have preferred that it be actually worded out properly in the documents you know for people to feel safe yeah so I would agree with that but should there be a you know is there a particular recourse available for people who are penalized on certain on such kind of a case is there is there any recourse that is currently available well I mean you can always make a representation to the DGCA you can always go to the court challenging an order there is actually very little precedence of the DGCA acting in any case right but but yeah you have a recourse in the court so it's just like any other criminal activity that you'll have to you know fight it out as well okay so what is what do you how do you see the future I mean what is the how what is the next stages of the policy how is it going to actually pan out what are the what is the current considerations being taken for new policy so in the in the very short run I think of the it's all bad news the there's very little you know kind of a movement that one expects on the policy front largely because you know the digital sky the technological backbone itself from all the conversations like at least I have had it's we are we are several months away from any kind of pilotable deployment as well and the covid situation is only going to extend these timelines indefinitely so I I think there is little hope on that front what will and should happen is that the DGCA starts to provide for exempted use cases or a faster way to get licenses on an exact you know for for exempted use cases etc right so for emergencies for for government agencies so for example I mean there is no reason why we can't have a fast track approval for government agencies for ps use to use within their industrial premises for large vected in cleared infrastructure projects right I mean a lot of these kind of use cases could have been by now allowed and even while we debate the larger use by the public at large I understand the concerns around that I mean not that I'm fully you know happy with how much time we've taken on that but I still understand that's going to take some time but at least some of these low risk high impact activities by the police by the government by the ps use by cleared industrial you know all of that could have been permitted and if not done so far I think the DGCA should now consider doing so at least they should actually open out of case by case approval you know active for drone use even if it is not in full compliance with a certain policy it's a case by case is still open and because under the policy you can apply you know you can get a case by case approval the problem is that there is a intention action mismatch right you your policy allows for it but you're not really acting on it you're not really giving out approvals and there is no no process in place there are no set of rules on the basis of which you will approve or deny there is no timeline which is prescribed so the absolute uncertainty of things has called the industry. Okay so that is interesting and one more last question that I have with regard to DGCA being the policy and enforcement unfortunately being law and order problem would come under the state how is the division actually happening who is responsible for what is there any understanding on that? The local enforcement can only be done by the police right what the DGCA can do is of course it can file complaints or it can sustain your UIN or the operator permit etc it can bar you from you know licensing in the future etc so those are the kind of actions that the DGCA can take. Okay so because there was a recent case of Telangana MP who was arrested for flying a drone and this is the first of its kind and so DGCA in this case is not part of that enforcement as I understand it's purely local. Arrests can only be made by local police obviously and yeah okay so but that's kind of interesting because I think it's almost wrong to make a law which can't be imposed entirely you know it's sometimes it's like that when you're having a situation wherein you don't have NPNT that is completely you know usable it's not live yet and you already have the regulation we are in a kind of a limbo where you can't comply entirely in complete letter and spirit but you're still having a regulation which you have to comply with. Absolutely. So but is there any way to get around this I mean what is the current is it still a case by case that is actually going on right now or is it being dealt with right now? You mean approvals or enforcement? As of now approvals during this time when the NPNT and digital sky don't are still not live and the car 1.0 is already in effect so in between now what's happening how is it how are the approvals being given? Case by case and most likes are still without approval. So it's more or less illegal that is currently happening right now. Okay so that's interesting and what are any closing comments that you have on the policy and how are we going to go about it? I really look forward to deliveries being one among the big things and BVL is being one among the cornerstones for drone activity because that's when the real drone power actually gets to show in the markets. No sure I mean I think we see we have disseminated we've actually destroyed the local industry because of the time that we've taken to get to where we are and the skill very little insight. So I think we really need to have a rethink of the way we are approaching this. There was a point in time when car 1 was issued there was a lot of I think the problem was that we actually wanted to make an incredible set of regulations which are unprecedented at something that the world will follow. That was really the ambition of the ministry at that point in time and I think it was just over ambitious. We went, we lost kind of sight of the ground reality a little bit. So I think what we need to do now is to scale down our ambition instead of chasing digital sky. Of course we can carry on on that front but what we need to do is immediately allow for certain low risk activities and certain activities that can so case by case is one way to do it. We want to do case by case and have a clear set of process and rules for it and or otherwise we exempt larger categories of drone operations as a second industrial use or police use etc and subject to of course again a clear set of guidelines and rules but we need to start permitting certain use cases and unless we do that we will always remain scared of the kind of the because how do we understand the real risk to drone operations unless and until we allow some operations. I mean the way it is as much a learning for the industry as it is for the regulator as well. So you have to allow certain limited use cases and then see how you know the evaluate over a period of time the real risk that that activity imposes on the society and use that understanding to then evolve your regulations. So I think we really need to start get things into motion on that front. Yeah I agree with that and I really look forward to you know the regulation changing but I am very much concerned when you say I am saying that we need to lower our ambition. I really don't know whether we can lower our ambition means roll back a little bit on what the policy actually asks for. No, no I am not I don't mean by lowering I don't mean rolling back the policy. Not rolling back at least parts of it. That's not what I am saying. I am saying that you don't have to achieve so okay digital sky is an ambitious program right. If we wait for if we say that we are going to allow every single drone operation in the country only when the digital sky is finally implemented and tested and then implemented at scale then I am going to have three years of no activity in this country. I am saying that lower down that ambition allow some activity gradually while I mean digital sky is a good idea be at it but don't lose sight of the reality. We need we desperately need some level of drone activity in the country otherwise your local industry is also going to be many many years behind the global industry. Yeah on that note I think I think we've had a quite an interesting session so I mean I don't know I hope to see a better future for the drones and I think it's bright but we'll have to deal with these hurdles right now in the short term and in that I'd like to thank you Anurad for this time spent and I think our users have got our viewers have got to understand a lot more about the policy and why we've got here and how what we what we can hope to look forward to. So once again I'd like to thank you. Okay thank you so much. Really enjoyed it. Pleasure. So yeah thanks guys. Thanks for all. Thanks for viewing.