Supreme Court Gives Centre Four Weeks To Place Policy Regime On Child Sexual Abuse Material, Non-Consensual Intimate Content Online

The Supreme Court granted the Union of India four weeks to place on record a policy regime to deal with child sexual abuse material and other forms of non-consensual intimate content online.

The Solicitor General said that, subject to the Bill passing through the legislative process, an intermediary could be required not only to take such content down once it comes to its notice, but also to inform the police that someone has uploaded it.

The Court also heard a plea seeking directions to the Centre to take steps to prohibit the streaming of sexually explicit content on over-the-top (OTT) and social media platforms. In April, 2025, the Court had issued notice in the matter.

The Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana ordered, "The learned Solicitor General submits that the deliberations on the policy formulation are ongoing. He seeks and is granted four weeks. Ms. Aparna Bhat, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner NGO is willing to extend proposals and render assistance to the Union of India in the formulation of the proposed policy regime. We have no reason to doubt that the authorities in the Union of India will invite suggestions from all stakeholders."

Advocates Aparna Bhat and Vishnu Shankar Jain appeared for the Petitioners, while Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for the Union

The Court asked the Union to place on record the relevant policy regime. To which, Mehta replied, "I am in consultation with the Ministry and we must do something; there is no doubt about it."

The Court said, "But we would like a policy regime which, of course, means that other safeguards are also taken care of and, at the same time, this kind of menace is well controlled."

Advocate Aparna Bhat, appearing for the Petitioner NGO Prajwala, added, "It is not confined to children, because it comes out of—it's also about adults, because adults' explicit videos are also being transmitted. There was a mechanism set up by an earlier order of this Court, but that is dysfunctional now."

To which the Solicitor General replied that some statutory, legislative mechanism is in contemplation. "I cannot say more till it comes before the Parliament. But my learned friend's concern is right and I am not opposing that concern", he added.

Bhat added that there are videos and circulation of sexual assault videos. She added that the act may be consensual, but the transmission is non-consensual.

She said, "The other kind of material which we had seen is that sexual assault and gang rape videos were being circulated. And the concern we had was the Intermediary Guidelines, which have come into force in 2021 and have been notified, pertain to cases where the person concerned can complain...Only she (victim) can complain. The current guidelines state only she can complain. But if I receive such videos and I find it offensive, I should be able to complain."

Solicitor General replied, "No, I must tell my friend that under the regulatory framework, which is legislatively contemplated at this juncture, not only the person concerned, anyone who comes to know...As a matter of fact, subject to the Bill passing through the legislative process, there can be a possibility that, the moment that comes to the notice of the intermediary, he should not only take it down, it is his responsibility to intimate the police."

Bhat told the Court that mandatory reporting by intermediaries currently exists only in cases involving children. Under the POCSO Act, reporting is compulsory, and a coordinate bench of the Court has also issued a direction on the point.

She explained that intermediaries earlier were not reporting such content as a matter of obligation, but in the Just Rights case, a judgment authored by Justice Pardiwala made it mandatory for intermediaries operating in India to report to Indian authorities as well. However, she pointed out that this safeguard extends only to children, and there is presently no comparable mechanism for adults.

Recently, another bench of 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.

Accordingly, the matters were listed for a further date.

Cause Title: Uday Mahurkar v. Union of India and Ors.[W.P.(C) No. 313/2025] & Prajwala v. Union of India and Ors. W.P.(C) No. 318/2026]