Media cartel probe: DG report likely by mid-2026 as ad agencies face prolonged CCI scrutiny

As 2026 approaches, the Director General (DG), the investigative arm of the Competition Commission of India (CCI), is expected to submit its report in the high-profile cartelisation probe involving leading media and advertising agencies by mid-2026, according to people familiar with the matter. The findings are likely to mark a critical inflection point in an investigation that has already triggered sweeping raids, leniency disclosures and parallel legal battles in the Delhi High Court.

Sources said the DG’s report will be placed before the CCI by the middle of next year, after which affected media agencies will be given a limited window to respond to the investigation’s findings. The competition regulator will then deliberate on the submissions before pronouncing its final order. Legal experts caution that any adverse ruling is almost certain to be challenged before appellate forums, potentially extending the dispute well beyond 2026.

“The DG report will be a decisive moment, but not necessarily the end of the road,” said a competition law expert. “In cartel matters, parties frequently contest the investigation itself, including the methodology, scope and evidentiary basis, before higher courts.”

The investigation has gathered momentum through 2025, witnessing both enforcement action and courtroom challenges. In March this year, the CCI conducted coordinated search and seizure operations across nearly 10 locations, targeting some of the country’s largest advertising networks — Dentsu, GroupM, Publicis, Havas, IPG, Madison and Omnicom — along with industry bodies such as the Advertising Agencies Association of India (AAAI), Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA) and the Indian Broadcasting and Digital Foundation (IBDF).

The allegations of cartelisation under Section 3(3) of the Competition Act, 2002, which prohibits agreements between entities operating at the same level of the market that directly or indirectly fix prices, limit supply or otherwise distort competition. The CCI is probing whether media agencies coordinated advertising rates, discounts or trading practices, potentially disadvantaging advertisers and broadcasters.

According to legal experts tracking the case, the DG’s investigation will focus on internal communications, WhatsApp chats, coordinated rate cards, meeting records and agreements that could indicate collusion. If cartel behaviour is established, companies could face significant financial penalties and corrective measures that may reshape media-buying practices across television, digital and print platforms.

The probe was triggered after Dentsu approached the CCI in February 2024 under its leniency programme. In a statement earlier, Dentsu said it had proactively disclosed information to the regulator to support “reform from within” the industry.

“Dentsu India is among the country’s leading agency networks and with that comes the responsibility to act with integrity and accountability,” the company had said, adding that it had implemented enhanced audits, stricter governance and tighter internal controls following its disclosure.

While the investigation continues, the legal front has become increasingly contentious. Publicis and Madison have both moved the Delhi High Court, albeit on different grounds, challenging the manner in which the probe has been conducted.

TLG India Pvt. Ltd., the Indian arm of French advertising major Publicis Groupe, has petitioned the High Court arguing that the CCI wrongly initiated proceedings against “Publicis Groupe”, which it says is a brand name and not a juristic entity recognised under the Competition Act. The company has contended that only TLG India, as a registered legal entity, can be named as an opposite party in the proceedings.

Despite this, the DG issued summons to the CEO of Publicis Groupe South Asia. Publicis has argued that “Publicis Groupe South Asia” is not a registered entity but merely an internal regional designation. The petition seeks, among other reliefs, quashing of the summons and DG notices, inspection of case records, substitution of TLG India as the proper party, and rectification of the CCI’s initial order initiating the probe.

Madison Communications has taken a more confrontational stance, challenging the very basis of the investigation. In its writ petition, Madison has alleged that the CCI’s probe wrongly targets media agencies while ignoring what it describes as a “buyers’ cartel” allegedly formed by advertisers under the aegis of the ISA. The company has sought quashing of the search and seizure operations at its Mumbai office, setting aside of the CCI’s prima facie order, and cancellation of summons issued to senior executives, citing arbitrariness and non-application of mind.

With multiple challenges pending before the High Court and the DG report expected only by mid-2026, the case is set to remain a defining regulatory overhang for the advertising and digital media ecosystem. Legal experts say the outcome could have far-reaching implications, not just in terms of penalties, but also in reshaping industry conduct, governance standards and the balance of power between advertisers, agencies and media owners in India.