Hiking, running and cycling appear to be having their mountaineering moment in India with at least three instances of foreigners detained at Indian airports for carrying Garmin devices hosting technology not permitted for civilian use in India, reported from December 2024 onward.

Based on these news reports and a conversation with Garmin India, the crux of the problem seemed that the devices in question sported satellite communication technology, currently not allowed for civilian use in India and permitted import only for government use. Of the three instances cited, two – involving a cyclist and a runner – were from Goa, while one involving a hiker was from Delhi. The nationalities were Czech, Canadian and Scottish. The story of the Canadian ultrarunner / trail runner, Tina Lewis, was reported by the running website IRunFar and the website of the reputed magazine, Outside.

All the above-mentioned cases involved devices from Garmin’s inReach range of products. As per details on the website of Garmin, its inReach devices allow global two-way messaging via the global Iridium satellite network. If necessary, it can also trigger an interactive SOS message with one’s GPS coordinates to the Garmin Response 24/7 staffed emergency response coordination centre. The problem encountered in India concerns the device’s capacity for two-way communication via satellite. Based on past similar instances, it is also possible that the satellite network used in these models – Iridium – may be a problem. When contacted, an official of Garmin India said that the company imports and retails only its non-inReach line of products for use by civilians in India. Products from the company’s inReach range are imported exclusively for government use, he said. A report related to the recent detentions in India (and devices involved confiscated at the respective Indian airports), in Mint, dated January 3, 2025, said, “ The use of a device with built-in satellite transmitter is found to violate the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1933.’’ According to the Mint report, “ Garmin inReach and Garmin Edge 540 GPS devices are not allowed in India without authorisation. Earlier, a few foreign nationals were detained in India for carrying a Garmin Edge 540, a GPS-enabled cycle / bike computer that tracks speed, distance, and other metrics.’’

Indian embassies and consulates around the world have put out notices warning foreign visitors not to carry any satellite phone to India without prior permission as the device would be seized and the holder of the phone may be prosecuted under Indian law. These notices are available on the Internet. Information about the Garmin Edge 540, available on Garmin’s website, shows that it is compatible with at least two products hailing from the company’s inReach range of products (inReach Mini and inReach Mini 2). By definition, GPS devices use satellites. Based on available information, what appears to put the inReach range on the wrong side of the law in India – as happened with satellite phones earlier – is the capacity for two-way satellite-based communication; in the case of inReach devices, two-way messaging. Further, the notices put out by Indian missions abroad mention Thuraya / Iridium satellite phones as banned in India. As mentioned earlier, Garmin’s website says its inReach devices use the Iridium satellite network for their two-way messaging.

A perusal of the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act of 1933 (it is available on the government’s website) showed its Section 3 sayings so: Prohibition of possession of wireless telegraphy apparatus without licence. — Save as provided by Section 4, no person shall possess wireless telegraphy apparatus except under and in accordance with a licence issued under this Act. Section 4 said: Power of Central Government to exempt persons from provisions of the Act. — The Central Government may by rules made under this Act exempt any person or any class of persons from the provisions of this Act either generally or subject to prescribed conditions, or in respect of specified wireless telegraphy apparatus. India’s aversion for satellite communicators is not new. India denying permission for the use of satellite phones was a vexing issue in mountaineering. The government banned the use of these phones by civilians after it was found being used by militant groups (the laws were further tightened following the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks). Mountaineering teams arriving from overseas sometimes saw their satellite phones seized; instances of phones brought in and subsequently activated on a hike or expedition provoking a hunt by authorities for the source of the signal, have also occurred. In mountaineering, the limitation the ban caused, was most felt in situations involving accident at altitude and the same requiring emergency medical response and evacuation. Without a satellite phone, people ended up running to the nearest point where conventional mobile phone signals were available. In days preceding widespread mobile phone network, members of Indian civilian teams have even rushed all the way to the nearest village or town to get news of a mountaineering mishap out. In life and death situations, every second counts. Following representations made to the government, the government allowed the use of satellite phones in mountaineering on a case-by-case basis with users adhering strictly to the regulations laid down. There is a process to be followed for the same.  

However, as felt at ground level, this still falls considerably short of the needs of mountaineering and the business of adventure tourism, sources in the trade said. According to them, the government allowed select adventure tour operators – among the biggest in the business – to acquire satellite phones. Satellite phones can also be hired from the Indian Mountaineering Foundation (IMF). But in practice, these devices can’t still be used in mountainous states with sensitive international borders. Thus, the phones get carried along on expeditions, for example in Uttarakhand, but it’s a completely different situation in Jammu & Kashmir, Ladakh, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh. “ It is a strange situation. Indians going abroad to climb or hike enjoy the access to emergency communication that devices like satellite phones provide, for there are no restrictions in most countries overseas. But people climbing the Himalaya from India – foreigners and Indian – can’t avail the device except in certain portions. Fact is – satellite phones and satellite communicators have become the norm overseas for mountaineering expeditions and hikes in remote areas. People wish to stay connected. I don’t think the Indian government will be able to adequately develop tourism in the border areas if it does not acknowledge this reality,’’ the owner of one of India’s biggest adventure tourism companies said, when contacted. It must be mentioned here that against the backdrop of satellite phones banned in India or allowed only with strict restrictions, some civilian outfits working in the outdoors, took to using personal locator beacons. These devices can dispatch a SOS signal to its associated satellite network. There is no provision for two-way communication of any sort. It simply transmits the exact location where emergency medical response / evacuation is being sought. The signals, in the case of these beacons, are picked up by the network of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) – that is a major difference.  

Between mountaineering’s past rendezvous with satellite phones and the recent cases of people being detained for possessing Garmin devices sporting the inReach technology, there are some differences, both as regards the device and as regards a potential solution. According to the Garmin India official this blog spoke to, the company’s inReach devices don’t allow a phone conversation via satellite. What the technology permits is messaging. For more information, he suggested that this blog reach out to the company’s headquarters. On the face of it, the recent incidents of detention in India over possessing Garmin’s inReach devices, would seem a finer interpretation of Indian law. The old stories from mountaineering concerned voice telephony; the recent instances of detention for bringing Garmin inReach devices, pertain to satellite links enabling messaging and data exchange. From what one could make out, as long as a device offers satellite communication technology for civilian use that is not permitted by Indian law, it remains a violation. The authorities can’t be faulted. Outside magazine in its piece on Tina Lewis, noted that it reached out to the public relations office of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF – they manage security at Indian airports) but got no response. It says it got no response from the Indian embassy in Washington DC either. Garmin’s website includes India in a list of 14 countries that may regulate or prohibit the use or possession of a satellite communicator.  Others on the list are Afghanistan, Crimea region of Ukraine, Cuba, Georgia (SMS), Iran, North Korea, Myanmar, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Vietnam, China and Russia.

For an overview of what the recent detentions meant to India’s cycling community and the navigation devices cyclists have invested in, this blog spoke to one of India’s top cyclists. According to him, in tune with the growth of cycling – and within that, performance-oriented cycling – in India, there has been a rise in the acquisition of sophisticated bike computers. In due course, cyclists themselves noticed the problems they may face in getting the devices past airport security. Consequently, there has been over time, a sharing of information among cyclists about the relevance in getting an Equipment Type Approval (ETA) for their device from the government. The document is useful when dealing with security agencies. There are also lists in circulation, which mention the devices from various manufacturers that one may possess safely in India. All this has happened through the initiative of cyclists and cycling groups; the government, this blog was told, has been hardly pro-active in keeping the cycling community informed. “ When the recent spate of detentions happened, there was fresh worry in the cycling community. This is because by Indian standards of affordability, bike computers are quite expensive. Losing one through confiscation at the airport, is a lot of money lost,’’ the cyclist explained. However, he did not think that inReach devices may have been mistakenly acquired by Indian cyclists or adventurers because its two-way messaging and SOS facilities are most sought after by solo adventurers. Indians into solo adventure pursuits, are few, he felt. His views were shared by another leading cyclist; this person, well-known in the field of ultra-cycling. “ When the news of the recent detentions appeared, it caused a flutter in the community. The problem we face is that airport security and security agencies in general, see the Garmin name on a device and instantly become suspicious instead of bothering to find out if the particular model is banned or not. The problem becomes more pronounced in border areas. The last time I was in Leh; after I finished cycling, I chose to courier my Garmin back to Mumbai,’’ he said.   

Today’s hassles in the digital domain have a humble, yet no less accusatory, ancestor from the era of print. There was a time when civilian hikers and climbers possessing detailed contour maps of the Himalaya, were treated suspiciously by Indian security agencies. Some of that suspicion has since faded; some has merely carried over to the digital medium. As we know through human experience, in times of technology evolving fast and what is restricted today becoming accepted tomorrow, there is often a gap between law and what technology is capable of. How does one plug or bridge these gaps such that the use of technology for healthy purposes is permitted and those that aren’t so, get countered? For instance, in the Outside article on Lewis, she says that the Garmin inReach Mini, which she had, was an integral part of her travel kit and she didn’t feel the need to research before carrying it on her Indian trip because there had been no objection in the other countries she visited. Besides, as she pointed out, GPS technology is nowadays found even in watches. To develop bridges of understanding, engaging the authorities and lawmakers in conversation is essential.

This blog spoke to a retired bureaucrat who had previously served in a very senior position in the Indian government and is familiar with matters related to internal security. He suggested that if hikers, cyclists and motorcyclists wished to see such devices used, then making representations to the government – as happened in the case of mountaineering – would be the apt way out. The community of users / potential users has to discuss the matter with the government. In mountaineering, the government eventually understood the need to some extent and responded making a few concessions. For the world of hiking, cycling and running (even motorcycle touring), it may be more difficult, he said. The main catch here would be that unlike mountaineering, which is restricted to the Himalaya and the Karakorum, the locales for these activities span an entire sub-continent. There is also the challenge of users in this category being higher in number than the mountaineering community. Not to mention, in a typical mountaineering expedition, there may be a satellite phone for a whole team. It suffices. In comparison, bike computers and SOS devices with two-way messaging ability are more individually owned. Still, making representations to the government could be a beginning, he said. When contacted, a senior official of the Adventure Tour Operators Association of India (ATOAI) said that ATOAI has already taken up the matter with the government. The problem, he said, pertains mainly to Iridium-enabled devices. To fault is lack of awareness; both on the part of travellers arriving without checking whether the devices they are carrying are banned in India or not and Indian security agencies, who treat travellers suspiciously just because they have a GPS device on them. He was clear that there is no option but to be on the correct side of the law. “ Awareness is the only way out,’’ he said. A critical shortcoming in this context is that while Indian missions overseas have put out notices on the items banned, normal tourists and solo adventurers – the sort who may not be guided in their visit by an informed tour operator – have limited means of finding out which devices and models therein stand approved. This was highlighted by the leading adventure tour operator this blog spoke to as well; he said that the method of finding out what is approved should be easy. The ATOAI official said that ATOAI has asked manufacturers like Garmin for a list of devices and models therein, approved for use in India, which the association hopes to make publicly accessible via its website.

(The author, Shyam G Menon, is a freelance journalist based in Mumbai)