This random multistage cross-sectional population survey was undertaken to determine the prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) in subjects aged 25 years and above in India. The study was carried out in 77 centres (42 urban and 35 rural) to reflect the size and heterogeneity of the Indian population. 18,363 (9008 male and 9355 female) subjects were studied. 10,617 (5379 males and 5238 females) were from urban areas and 7746 (3629 males and 4117 females) from rural areas. Blood samples were taken after a fast of 10-12 and 2 h after 75 g of oral glucose. Subjects were categorized as having impaired fasting glycemia (IFG) or DM using the 1997 ADA or having impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) or DM using the 1999 WHO criteria. The age- and gender-standardized prevalence rate for DM using the ADA criteria was 3.6% whilst that using the WHO criteria was 4.3% (P < 0.001). The respective standardized prevalence of DM, using the two criteria was, 4.7 and 5.6%, respectively (P < 0.001) in the urban Indian population and 2.0 and 2.7% (P < 0.02) in the rural Indian population. Using the WHO criteria, 581 subjects were newly diagnosed whilst the ADA criteria newly diagnosed 437 subjects. The respective numbers for the urban population were 425 and 323, and for the rural population were 146 and 114, respectively. The ADA criteria could diagnose 75.2, 76.0 and 73.0% of the subjects who had DM as per the WHO criteria. Of 739 Indian subjects who had IFG, 106 (14.3%) were diagnosed as having DM by the WHO criteria whilst 505 (68.3%) had values compatible with a diagnosis of IGT. Of the 536 urban subjects with IFG, 74 (13.8%) had DM and 350 (65.3%) had IGT using the WHO criteria. Of the 302 rural subjects with IFG, 32 (15.8%) had DM and 155 (76.3%) had IGT using the WHO criteria. 505 (49.9%) of 1012 Indian subjects with IGT as per the WHO criteria had IFG. 350 (47.7%) of 733 urban subjects and 155 (55.5%) of 279 rural subjects with IGT had values compatible with IFG as per the ADA criteria. Type 2 diabetes is a major health problem is India. The use of the ADA criteria would underestimate the prevalence of DM by not diagnosing subjects showing a poor response to a glucose challenge. This along with the discrepancies between subjects showing IGF or IGT could be a challenge to any prevention program.