The Supreme Court expressed its displeasure over the failure of the Union Government to file its response on guidelines to be followed to curb Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse Material (CSEAM) on social media platforms.

The Court granted a last opportunity to the Union of India to file a detailed report highlighting the steps taken to give effect to its 2024 judgment and the future precautions to prevent procedural lapses by social media intermediaries.

The Court was hearing a plea that had raised concerns about the lapses on the part of social media intermediaries in complying with the due diligence obligations under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the mandatory reporting obligations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

On August 21, 2026, the Court issued notice in the application and sought a response from the Union of India. An application was filed in an appeal where the Court set aside a Madras High Court's ruling, which said that mere downloading and watching of child pornography is not an offence under the POCSO Act and the Information Technology Act.

While delivering the landmark judgment on the POCSO Act, the Court had highlighted the widespread misconceptions about sex education in India, including beliefs that it encourages promiscuity or conflicts with traditional values, that have limited its implementation.

The Bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice K Vinod Chandran ordered, "By our order dated 14th of August 2026, we had directed the Union of India, through the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, as well as the Ministry of Law and Justice, to file their counter/report as regards the subject matter of the miscellaneous application. Unfortunately, till this date, no such counter or report has come on record. The matter before us is extremely serious. We give one last opportunity to both the Ministries to file their counter/report. The counter/report should explain clearly what steps the two Ministries have taken to give effect, meaningful effect, to the directions issued by this Court in the main judgment and what steps have been taken so far to curb this menace as highlighted in the miscellaneous application. The counter/report should also indicate in so many words what precautions the Government would be taking in future to prevent lapses on the part of social media intermediaries. Post it on 15th of October."


ASG KM Nataraj appeared for the Respondents

The Applicants submitted that there are news reports flagging alleged incidents of paid advertisements promoting Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse Material (“CSEAM”) on social media platforms, whereby users are redirected to other websites or social media platforms, where such material is offered for monetary consideration.

The counsel appearing for the Applicant submitted, "Today, two years have passed since the judgment. On 23rd September 2024, these directions were given, and still, no guidelines have been framed, and only in the last week, two companies have agreed to submit this information before the Indian authorities. Only Google and Meta have done that. So, all we are requesting is compliance with the direction of the 23rd September order; a guideline and a standard operating procedure be framed that actually mandates all social media companies and intermediaries to report all such sexual exploitative and abusive material before the local police as well as before the cyber crime."

The Union submitted that they need more time to file a reply in the matter. 

The Court said, "Our last order is very clear. Have you all taken up this issue seriously...What do you propose to do? How do you propose to give effect to the directions issued by this Court in the 2024 judgment? And what precautions will you be taking in future to ensure that such—what is it called?"

The Union responded that the report is at a stage of finalization and hence, they need some more time to file.

Accordingly, the Court granted a last opportunity to the Union to file its response.

The Application has prayed for directions to the Union of India to formulate and notify a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) prescribing a uniform protocol to be followed by all intermediaries covering the end-to-end process of user interface or content uploading, inter alia, including detection or reporting of CSEAM, mandatory reporting to the competent law enforcement agency, reporting formats and timelines for compliance, preservation of electronic evidence, identification and preservation of IP address information, sharing of such information with investigating agencies, inter-agency coordination, and victim-centric safeguards.

Recently, on September 22, 2026, another application was filed by the Network for Access to Justice and Multidisciplinary Outreach Foundation seeking impleadment in the matter. The Foundation has also prayed for directions that the mandatory reporting obligations under Sections 19 and 20 of the POCSO Act and the law already decided by the Court be strictly implemented and enforced, without being diluted, modified, or substituted through any SOP or administrative mechanism.

The Applicant, Network for Access to Justice and Multidisciplinary Outreach Foundation, is an organisation working in the field of human rights, child rights, legal research, policy development and strengthening institutional responses concerning vulnerable persons, including children.

The Application, filed by AOR Sunita Sharma, stated, "The sequence of acts assumes considerable significance, as each stage may constitute a distinct offence attracting separate legal consequences, namely: (a) the sexual abuse or exploitation of the child itself, being the foundational offence; (b) the photographing, videographing, filming or other recording of such abuse, or use of the child for creation of pornographic material; (c) the possession or storage of such material; and (d) its uploading, sharing, transmission, dissemination or circulation, including subsequent downloading, forwarding, redistribution or commercial exploitation, as applicable. These acts are therefore not necessarily manifestations of one homogeneous offence but may constitute distinct stages of criminal. conduct attracting separate consequences under the POCSO Act and other applicable penal laws."

Previously, the Court had also made several key suggestions to the Union Government, specifically the Ministry of Women and Child Development, to amend the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The Bench had advised the Parliament to consider amending the POCSO Act, with the Union of India possibly issuing an ordinance to implement the change in the interim. In addition, the Court had directed that the term "child pornography" should no longer be used in judicial orders or judgments, and that "Child-Sexual Exploitative and Abuse Material" (CSEAM)" be adopted instead.

On April 19, 2024, the Court had reserved its verdict in the SLP. It is to be noted that on March 11, the Bench issued notice in the SLP. The Court had also sought the response of S. Harish, a resident of Chennai, and the Tamil Nadu Police.

On January 11, 2024, the Madras High Court had held that the mere act of watching or downloading child pornography does not make out an offence under Section 67-B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act).

Cause Title: Justice Rights for Children Alliance and Anr. v. S. Harish & Ors. [Misc Application Diary No(s).41028/2026] 

Tags: