“Threatening Problem”: Madras High Court Directs MeitY To Remove Intimate Images & Videos Of Female Advocate Shared By Boyfriend On Digital Platforms

The Madras High Court has directed the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to remove the Non-Consensual Intimate Images and Videos (NCII) of a female Advocate which were shared by her boyfriend on digital platforms.

A Writ Petition was filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus, directing the MeitY to act upon the representation made by the victim by taking all appropriate measures of blocking/removing/issuing take down notices/issuing directions to all concerned intermediaries/websites/pornographic platforms/telecommunication service providers to forthwith and on a continuing basis detect, remove, and block all content depicting her NCII.

A Single Bench of Justice N. Anand Venkatesh observed, “The Delhi High Court had taken tremendous effect in some how trying to find a solution for this threatening problem faced by young girls across the country. This lengthy exercise that was undertaken by the Court has to be followed up by the respondent, since it is the duty of the State to safeguard the fundamental rights of its citizens. It is only the respondent who has been vested with the power, even as per their own stand taken before the Delhi High Court, to initiate action under the Information Technology Act for removal of the contents from the Internet and social media platforms.”

The Bench emphasised that it is the duty of a Constitutional Court to safeguard the fundamental rights that have been guaranteed to all persons and not limited to just citizens when it comes to gross violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Senior Advocate Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam appeared for the Petitioner while Senior Panel Counsel (SPC) A. Kumaraguru appeared for the Respondents.

Case Background

The Petitioner was an Advocate practising before the High Court and District Judiciary. During her college days, she had a love affair with a person and this relationship allegedly became intimate as that person promised to marry her. She placed immense trust upon him and due to constant promises and emotional manipulation, he allegedly started sexually assaulting her repeatedly. She believed his words and submitted herself without being aware of the fact that the physical intimacy is being surreptitiously filmed and transmitted on the internet and other digital platforms. It was alleged that her boyfriend had shared the videos multiple times, which were downloaded and reloaded on various digital platforms. The same were re-shared and displayed on pornographic websites as well as on the social media platforms.

The Petitioner came to know about the same when one of her friends informed her and being aggrieved, she gave a complaint which resulted in the registration of FIR for various offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act), and also under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act. It was further alleged that the illegally recorded video depicting the Petitioner in a vulnerable state was shared and transmitted across more than 70 websites and various other telecommunication and digital platforms. The distribution and transmission of the video reached such an extent that the Petitioner was subjected to questioning about the video and its contents by various individuals including clients and peers in the same profession. In order to control the reputational damage, she made a representation to the Respondent to remove the content but the same was not acted upon. Hence, she filed the Writ Petition before the High Court.

Court’s Observations

The High Court in the above context of the case, said, “Right to privacy and right to dignity is guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The same is being violated every second insofar as the petitioner is concerned. Therefore, this Court has to exercise its power and ensure that the untold agony faced by the petitioner is atleast mitigated by removing those contents as early as possible and to ensure that the petitioner is able to lead a normal life atleast in future.”

The Court, therefore, directed the Respondent to immediately act upon the complaint given by the Petitioner and take appropriate measures to block/ remove/issue take down notices/issue directions to all concerned intermediaries/websites/pornographic platforms/telecommunication service providers to forthwith detect, remove and block all content depicting the Petitioner’s NCII which are being uploaded, shared, re-uploaded, transmitted or distributed over the Internet and digital platforms and ensure the effective removal of such content and prevent its further dissemination on any Internet or digital platform at present or in the future.

“This exercise shall be completed by the 1st respondent, within a period of 48 hours. … Post this writ petition under the caption 'For Reporting Compliance' on 14.07.2025. … The learned Senior Panel Counsel appearing on behalf of the 1st respondent shall also take written instructions from the 1st respondent on the future course of action that is going to be taken by the 1st respondent based on the directions that has already been issued by the Delhi High Court”, it further directed.

The Court kept the Writ Petition pending in order to issue continuing mandamus to at least ensure that such situations are effectively dealt with in future. In order to create awareness among the police, the Court suo motu added the Director General of Police as the 2nd Respondent in this Writ Petition.

Accordingly, the High Court issued necessary directions.

Cause Title- X v. The Union of India & Anr. (Case Number: WP No. 25017 of 2025)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Senior Advocate Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam and Advocate Rajagopal Vasudevan.

Respondents: SPC A. Kumaraguru and Government Advocate V. Meganathan.

Click here to read/download the Order