Advertising agency Madison Communications has approached the Delhi High Court seeking to quash an ongoing antitrust investigation by the Competition Commission of India (CCI), arguing that its executives were questioned unlawfully during raids conducted in March without legal counsel present, according to court filings reviewed by Reuters.
Madison was among several major advertising agencies and broadcasters raided by the CCI earlier this year over alleged collusion on advertising rates and discounts, marking one of the regulator’s toughest crackdowns on the sector to date. Other agencies searched include WPP’s GroupM, Dentsu, Publicis, and Omnicom.
The petition, filed on 8 October, is the first legal challenge seeking to halt the CCI’s probe into one of the firms. In its 276-page filing, Madison claimed that Chairman Sam Balsara and Executive Director Vikram Sakhuja were questioned “in the middle of the night” without being given an opportunity to consult lawyers, and that the questioning took place “in the presence of armed personnel”. Court filings in India are not made public.
Madison questions legality of CCI raids
Madison further argued that the CCI raids were rendered illegal as the watchdog has not provided details of which documents and files were seized, as required under Indian law. The lack of disclosure, the company said, violated principles of “transparency, fairness, and due process”.
The CCI did not respond to Reuters’ request for comment, while Madison also declined to comment. The CCI’s investigation was launched after Dentsu disclosed alleged industry malpractices in February 2024 under the regulator’s leniency programme, which offers reduced penalties to entities that voluntarily share evidence of wrongdoing.
According to confidential case papers reviewed by Reuters, the CCI’s preliminary findings suggested that certain agencies may have formed secret pricing pacts via a WhatsApp group.
The Delhi High Court is scheduled to hear Madison’s plea on Thursday. The court may decide to admit the petition, pause the investigation, or dismiss the plea altogether.
Separately, Publicis has also approached the Delhi High Court, asking the regulator to grant it access to case files related to the same probe. The court has sought the CCI’s response and will hear that case on Thursday as well. Publicis, however, has not sought to have the investigation quashed.
Access to evidence denied
Madison has also alleged that the CCI unlawfully prevented its lawyers from reviewing key evidence forming the basis of the case. In an August letter to the company, the regulator maintained that Indian law does not permit inspection of investigation records while a probe is in progress.
The CCI’s investigations typically run for several months. The regulator is empowered to levy penalties of up to three times a company’s profit or 10% of its global turnover, whichever is higher, for each year of proven misconduct. The CCI has also summoned Balsara and Sakhuja to appear before its investigation team next week for clarification. Madison’s petition seeks to have those summonses quashed as well.