Hardly. The colonial system started to evolve from approx 1600 [0] but industrialisation [1] didn't start in the UK until at least 150 later
So, I agree - an accurate statement would be to say "English involvement in India came out of the prevailing ideology of mercantilism, and it then grew into a colonial state". The colonial state did lead to India's deindustrialization - ex: the flourishing textile industries of the subcontinent were not allowed to modernize. But counterfactuals are hard. (I still think an area of the world at the forefront of textile production for thousands of years would not have gone gently into the good night without a fight.)
It's not exactly a conspiracy.
Besides globalization itself is a relatively a new phenomenon and we did get started on that.
Also merely blaming these policies for slow growth is wrong. India has a range of socio-religious problems, which just can't go hand in hand with requirements for high growth economies, that is things like high quality public education, equality of access to opportunity, a degree of fairness in society and focus towards larger goals etc. India is just not there yet. Even domestic political goals are just something else.
Basically India is trying to make Biryani out of Idly batter.