AOR Nar Hari Singh
In today’s digital economy, user experiences are carefully designed not only to serve but also to influence, giving rise to “dark patterns”- deceptive interfaces that manipulate users into unintended actions. These tactics, often disguised as harmless features, undermine consumer autonomy and raise ethical, legal, and regulatory concerns. As India’s digital ecosystem rapidly expands, laws are struggling to keep pacewi thsuch hidden manipulations. Dark patterns exploit cognitive biasesanduser inattention to push outcomes favoring businesses, often at the user’s expense, highlighting the urgent need for stronger consumer protections.
Common examples include:
– Baitands witch: Advertising alow price, only to switch at checkout.
– Forced continuity : Making subscription cancellations complex.
– Hidden costs: Adding unexpectedc hargeslate in the checkout process.
– Trickqu estions: Confusingwording to trick users intoconsenting.
– Confirm shaming:Guilt-tripping users foropting out (e.g.,” Nothanks, Ilike paying full price”).
Regulatory Crack down on Dark Patterns:
In India, the frame work for regulating dark patterns is still evolving, though certain existing laws already provide indirect safeguards. Key legislations include the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, and the Information Technology Act, 2000.
Consumer Protection Act, 2019: The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) issued the Guide lines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023, effective from 30th November 2023, under this Act. Applicable to all online platforms, sellers, and advertisers in India, the guide lines aim to prevent deceptive UI designs-dark patterns- that mislead or manipulate users. Banned tactics include fake urgency, confirmshaming, auto-adding items to carts, drip pricing, and complex subscription cancellations. These are classified as unfair trade practices under Section 2(47),enabling enforcement actions under Sections 17 to 21. First-time penalties can reach
Rs 10 lakh, rising to Rs 50 lakh and even imprisonment upto two years forrepeated non- compliance under Section 21.
In the case of Jatin Bansal Vs. Amazon Re-seller Services Pvt. Ltd. and Ors., the Chandigarh State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission held that darkpatterns and deceptive practices fall under unfair trade practices. The defaulting party was ordered to refund the complainant and pay Rs 2 lakh in compensation.
Indian Contract Act, 1872: Darkpatterns implicate the Act’s corer equirement of free, informed consent. Section 13 defines consent as agreement on the same thing in the same sense, and states that consent is not free if caused by coercion, undue influence, fraud, or misrepresentation. Manipulative
UI that misleads users or hides material terms mayamount tomisrepresentation or undue influence, makinga contract voidable under Section 19. Section 19 allows a party to rescind a contract if consent was improperly obtained. While Section 23 prohibits unlawful objects, dark patterns typically vitiate consent rather than making a contract illegal. No Indian case has yet addressed dark patterns under this Act, but the legal principles apply: consent obtained through coercive or deceptive design is not free, making the contract voidable.
Competition Act, 2002: Dark patterns may also have anti-competitive implications. Section 3 bars collusive agreements, while Section 4 prohibits a dominant firm from abusing its position through unfair conditions or lock-ins. Section 4 (2) specifically bans unfair/discriminatory sale conditions (4 (2) (a) (i)), unrelated supplementary conditions (4( 2) (d)), and practices thatres trictin novation or market access (4 (2) (b) (ii)- (c)). Classic dark patterns map onto these: basket sneaking violates 4 (2) (a) (i), subscription traps violate 4 (2) (b) (ii), and forced continuity violates 4 (2) (d). Dominant platforms using such designs may be abusing their dominance. In Bharat Matrimonyv. Google (2018), the CCI found Google abused dominance through self-preferencing.
The CCI has acknowledged the competition implications of dark patterns and warned against algorithmic collusion. Following a 2019 complaint by the Delhi Vyapar Mahasangh, the CCI’s Director General opened a 2020 probe into Amazon and Flipkart over anti-competitive coordination. While this case focused on pricing and product listings, it shows the CCI ‘s scrutiny of platform practices. In July 2023, CAIT filed a complaint to the CCI alleging Amazon used dark patterns to “force” Prime subscriptions and hinder cancellations-deeming it anti-competitive. In late 2024, the CCPA also issued a notice to Amazon India for enrolling users into Prime via deceptive interfaces, under the Consumer Protection Act.
Information Technology (IT)A ct, 2000: Sections 66C and 66D penalize fraudulent useof computer resources and identity theft withup to 3 years’ imprisonment and Rs1 lakh fines. Section 72 punishes breaches of confidentiality with up to 2 years’ imprisonment or Rs1 lakh fine, or both.
In the case of Pankaj Chandgothia Vs. The Coffee Bean & Tea and Ors., the commission ord ered the deletion of the complainant’s personal data, directed the party to cease dark patternprac tices,a nd awarded compensation forengaging inunfair trade practices.
Dark Pattern Trends & IndustryPatterns
Dark patterns are nolonger mere design flaws-they are deliberate tools, strategically deployed by dominant corporations to exploit consumers through unequal bargaining power and information asymmetry. These practices often present seemingly standard interfaces or contracts that conceal biased terms or manipulateuser choices. Consider the following illustrations drawn from real-world scenarios and prevailing industry practices:
One-Sided Contracts in Insurance and Financial Services
Insurance aggregators of ten list low-premium health or term policies that exclude key coverageslikepre- existing diseases or maternity-details buried in legaljargon or fine print. Consumers, misled by incomplete disclosures, agree in good faith but later face claim denials, exposing the contract’s structural bias favoring the insurer.
Cab Aggregators and Algorithmic Discrimination
Ride hailing app shave shown different fares on different devices for identical routes and times, reflecting algorithmic price discrimination. Users cannot verify fare calculations or challenge them, illustrating extreme information asymmetry and absence of bargaining power.
Airfare Inflation Based on Search History Flight portals use cookies to inflate ticket prices after repeatedsearches and show false scarcity like “Only 1 seat left!” to pressure users into quick bookings. These tactics create artificial urgency and manipulate buyer decisions based on tracking behavior.
In the Suo Motocase, the CCPAtook action against Inter Globe Aviation Ltd. (Indi Go) after complaints of unfair seat selection, confirm shaming, and poor web check-in transparency. Despite IndiGo’s defense, CCPA held that the lack of clear notice misled users into thinking paid seats elec tion was mandatory. The airlin ewas ordered to revise its app and comply with DGCA guidelines.
E-Commerce Platform s and “Consent Laundering”
User softe nunknowingly permitplatforms to track their behavior and use personal data by merely browsing. Opt-outs are hidden behind complex steps-designs like “roach motels” make exit hard. Auto-renewals and confusing cancellations trap users in unwanted subscriptions.
Overpricing of Online Products
E-commerce siteslist low baseprice sbutadd hidden costs-like packaging orinflated delivery charges-only at check out. This exploits the consumer’s purchase commitment after product selection. Such practices mislead consumers and are actionable as unfair trade practices under the Consumer Protection Act.
Suggestions & Conclusion
To curbinflated pricing through hidden charges one-commerce platforms, there is a need for transparent pricing structures, uniform standards banning concealed fees, and clear cost breakdowns. Consumer awareness must be enhanced through legal education,while stricterpenaltieand regular monitoring should beenforcedagainst violators. Tackling these dark patterns isessential to protect consumers and ensure a fair, trustworthy digital market place.
(This article shares the author’s personal view on dark patterns and the escalated concerns associated with them.)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
