The latest amendment in electronic transaction law has been introduced at a time when digital platforms, online marketplaces and e-payment systems are rapidly becoming the backbone of the economy. Governments across the world are updating their electronic laws to support faster business, reduce paperwork and make online agreements legally enforceable. This amendment gives wider legal recognition to digital signatures, electronic records and online contracts. It also strengthens the power of regulators to monitor and control digital platforms. While the stated objective is to modernize the economy, many farmer organisations, rural groups and consumer rights activists argue that the law has been drafted without fully understanding the realities of rural India and the vulnerabilities of those who have limited digital literacy.
Experts caution that the amendment may actually create new risks for farmers. The biggest fear is that digital contracts will become fully binding once a farmer taps “I agree” or uses a digital signature. For many farmers who are not familiar with legal language, this may lead them into agreements that contain hidden clauses about pricing, penalties, delivery conditions or delayed payments. Once these online contracts are signed, they become extremely difficult to challenge in court. This increases the imbalance between small farmers and large companies who have legal teams and financial power on their side. In this sense, the new digital law may deepen the unequal bargaining power that already exists in agricultural trade.
Another major issue is the widening threat of data exploitation. The amendment allows for broader use and processing of electronic data, and this raises concerns about how companies may collect and use farmers’ information. Corporations can track crop patterns, estimate harvest volumes, predict market behaviour and use this data to manipulate procurement prices. The fear is that farmers’ private data could turn into a commercial asset for companies, allowing them to control agricultural markets through analytics and algorithms. Without strict data protection rules built into the amendment, farmers are exposed to serious economic manipulation.
The amendment also risks increasing the digital divide between rural and urban India. Many villages still face poor internet access, lack of smartphones and low levels of digital education. If essential trading and contracting procedures shift entirely to digital platforms, farmers who cannot operate these systems may be pushed further to the margins. Instead of empowering them, the new law could strengthen the dominance of large agritech companies and online marketplaces. These platforms may eventually dictate procurement prices, leaving farmers with no room to negotiate. The fear of monopoly is real, and several farm unions have expressed concern that digital mandis will replace physical mandis without offering the same transparency or fairness.
Even the dispute-resolution mechanisms under the amended law pose challenges. Digital dispute systems require online documentation, e-filing and virtual hearings. Most farmers neither have legal support nor technological resources to fight such cases. This leaves them vulnerable to companies that can use complex legal procedures to their advantage. In short, the amendment may unintentionally deepen the structural flaws that already exist in the agricultural system.
However, it is important to acknowledge that the amendment could also bring benefits if it is implemented with strong safeguards. Digital contracts, if simple and transparent, can guarantee faster payments and reduce the interference of middlemen. Electronic documentation can prevent disputes related to quantity, quality and delivery. Digital platforms can help farmers reach markets beyond their local mandis, giving them better price options. In theory, the law has the potential to make trade smoother and more transparent, but only if the system is farmer-friendly, regulated and monitored.
For ordinary consumers, the amendment may offer certain advantages such as organised digital marketplaces, faster services and clearer online receipts or warranties. At the same time, consumers may face rising digital fraud, misuse of personal data and algorithm-based price manipulation. Rural consumers who lack access to digital tools may also feel excluded from essential services that gradually shift to online-only systems.
In conclusion, the amendment in electronic law is a major step toward a digital future, but its impact depends entirely on implementation. For farmers, the risks are serious: digital illiteracy, data exploitation, unequal bargaining power and platform monopolies can severely weaken their economic position. Unless the government introduces strong safeguards, rural digital training, transparent pricing rules and strict data-protection laws, the amendment could cause more harm than good. It has the potential to benefit farmers, but without proper protections, it may instead create a new set of challenges for those who are already struggling.