Algorithmic Predation and Digital Gatekeeping: A Critical Study of Abuse of Dominance by Big Tech under Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002

The digital marketplaces have changed the rules of anti-competitive behaviour. Big Tech firms have shifted from traditional predatory pricing to advanced AI-assisted exclusion strategies. Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 originally focused on below-cost pricing, chances of recouping losses, and blocking competitors, as seen in the lengthy Google Android case by the CCI. Nowadays, digital platforms use complex strategies like price discrimination, self-preferential treatment, data mixing, search manipulation, and bundling to outpace competitors. They gain niche market shares while locking in loyal customers without facing significant financial fallout or being easily detected. The current Indian anti-competitive system takes a long time for investigations and tests, which do not match the fast pace of digital markets or the lack of transparency in algorithms. Google's ₹1,337 crore fine came years too late for the competitors that were excluded. The DCB offers a solution by introducing proactive tools to identify Systemically Significant Digital Enterprises (SSDE) and Systemically Important Digital Intermediaries (SIDIs). It can impose pre-emptive bans on tying, data misuse, and self-preferential strategies without needing to analyse each case individually. However, the downside is that such measures may result in wrong decisions, hinder innovation, and create excessive compliance requirements. This could undermine the Act's important principle of "rule of reason." This paper argues for a balanced approach. It suggests combining post-investigation inquiries with specific proactive measures to prevent hidden predation while supporting India’s digital revolution.