- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
With the cyber world increasingly infested by porn, especially child porn, it is the duty of parents, teachers, students and the public to protect children and the society at large from its ill effectsOne of the most growing concerns in today’sCyber world has been its darker side. Yes...of the rise in Cyber Crime. One of the biggestchallenges being faced by society are theadverse effects...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
With the cyber world increasingly infested by porn, especially child porn, it is the duty of parents, teachers, students and the public to protect children and the society at large from its ill effects
One of the most growing concerns in today’s
Cyber world has been its darker side. Yes...
of the rise in Cyber Crime. One of the biggest
challenges being faced by society are the
adverse effects of viewing porn by teenagers
and the porn explosion which has made children gullible
to aggression of paedophiles. Sexual crimes by minors are
on the rise and the easy accessibility to porn is considered
one of the major reasons. Today’s generation lives in the
world of ‘Tech’... WhatsApp, Facebook, online chat sites and
what not. It’s good to be ‘Tech Savvy’ but if one uses these
services/apps to harm others or themselves, it comes with
ill effects. Specially, youngsters get into the trap of such ill
effects and get victimized.
Nowadays, everybody has internet connections on their
cell phones. Many a time, bus drivers, conductors, cleaners
take advantage of innocent children, induce them to
watch porn on their mobiles and indulge in molestation
and sodomization of the child. In 2015, one such reported
incident happened where a bus driver allegedly molested
a school girl after watching porn on his mobile which he
confessed to during interrogation by police. Now, such type
of criminal activities are not only limited to adults but
are also growing amongst teenagers and youngsters. The
reasons are manifold and some of them are: Easy access to
internet connections available on mobiles and computers,
lack of strict parameters and lack of vigilance in the Cyber
world like effective filters and lack of strict accountability to
Intermediaries (which includes Telecom Service Providers,
Network Service Providers (NSP), Internet Service Providers
(ISP), Web Hosting Service Providers, online payment sites,
online market places, cyber cafés etc.) Youngsters have
easy access to porn and sexually explicit content on the
mobile phone. This in turn has increased sexual crimes
and victimization of minors. As these are publicly shared
without compunction, even children would be exposed to
this, critically affecting their emotional and psychological
well-being.
One such reported incident happened again in 2015 in
Hyderabad where an engineering student allegedly stalked
more than 200 teen girls online through Facebook and
blackmailed them with their naked pictures, threatening
to display them on social media sites. Countries like the
United States of America in 1998 enacted Children Online
Privacy of Protection Act (COPPA) as they have seen threats
of lack of privacy of children on the internet. COPPA
imposes certain requirements on operators of websites or
online services directed at children under 13 years of age,
and on operators of other websites or online services that
have actual knowledge that they are collecting personal
information online from a child under 13 years of age.
In 2000, CIPA (Children’s Internet Protection Act) was
developed to implement safe internet policies and rules,
and usage of filter software.
Watching a Pornographic film or its possession at home is
not an offense:
The Law accepts that obscene content has the tendency to
deprave and corrupt the mind of the accused but it does not
punish a person who watches the content in a private room
or to have possession of at home. The Hon’ble High Court
of Madras in case of V. Sundarranjan Vs. State of Tamil
Nadu (Crl P.C No. 376/1978) held that if a blue film is found
in the possession of the accused, he cannot be convicted
simply on the grounds of possession unless it is further
proved that the purpose was for selling or letting out. Also in
case of Jagdish Chavla v. State of Rajasthan, 1999 Cr. LJ
2562 (Raj) Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan held that mere
viewing of obscene films at home on TV with VCRs does
not amount to an offense under section 292 IPC because an
offense under section 292 IPC can only be made when an
obscene article is kept for sale, distribution, circulation and
public exhibition. It is only when the person viewing the
content goes out of the door and calls his friends for public
exhibition of the prohibited material that an offense under
section 292 IPC is committed.
Some of the Indian Legislation on this subject:
Though under The Information Technology Act, 2000,
specially sections 67, 67A and 67B that prohibit publication
or transmission of any obscene material or sexually explicit
act or conduct or any material depicting children in sexually
explicit act in the electronic form and is punishable with
imprisonment which may extend to seven years with fine
which may extend to 10 lakh rupees depending on the
offense under the aforesaid sections. Under the Indian
Penal Code, Sections 292 and 293 prohibits sale, purchase
or hire etc. of obscene books and is punishable which may
extend to seven years with fine which may extend to 5,000
Rupees and further Section 354 A(iii) prohibits showing
pornography against the will of the woman and it is
punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which
may extend to 3 years or with fine or with both. Under The
Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986-
sections 3 and 4 prohibits advertisements or exhibition or
publication or sending by post of books containing indecent
representation of women in any form is punishable with
imprisonment which may extend to five years with fine
which may extend to '1 lakh. Under The Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) ACT, 2012 - Section
13 says that whoever uses children for pornographic
purposes in any form of media (including programs or
advertisements telecast by television channels or internet
or any other electronic form or printed form, whether or not
such programs or advertisements are intended for personal
use or for distribution), for purposes of sexual gratification
shall be punishable with imprisonment not less than five
years and may extend to seven years and 10 years and
imprisonment for life and are also liable to fine depending
on the manner of the child being used for pornographic
purposes.
As per the Information Technology (Intermediaries
Guidelines) Rules, 2011 - As per Rule 3 envisaged that
the intermediaries shall observe due diligence while
discharging their duties and to frame regulations, one of
them which is enumerated in the rule is that it shall inform
the users of computer resource not to host, display, upload,
modify, publish, transmit, update or share any information
that is grossly harmful, obscene, pornographic, pedophilic,
ethically objectionable etc.
A pending writ petition Kamlesh Vaswani Vs. Union of
India (WP 177 of 2013) has been filed before the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India, in which inter alia one of the
prayers of the Petitioner has been a complete ban on
Pornography sites in India. On behalf of Supreme Court
Women Lawyers’ Association (SCWLA), the author has filed
an application and has given many suggestions before the
Hon’ble Supreme Court. In the aforesaid matter, the bench
of Hon’ble Justice Dipak Mishra and Hon’ble Justice Shiva
Kirti Singh vide order dated 26.2.2016 after hearing all the
parties directed that suggestions given by all parties may be
considered. Ms. Mahalaksmi Pavani, Sr. Adv. Supreme Court
and President of SCWLA argued on behalf of SCWLA. She
argued that “Child pornography is spreading like cancer and
it would not be out of place to call it a moral cancer...”. The
aforesaid matter is sub judice before the Hon’ble Supreme
Court. Let’s hope that the Apex Court of India issues certain
guidelines and directions to all the stakeholders in tackling
this social problem.
Well... who is to be blamed? Do we have enough legislation
to curb this problem or we need some more stringent laws...
Has our Government failed to implement the legislation?
Have stakeholders made efforts to curb this menace?
Well perhaps, the answer which comes to my mind is that
collective effort has to be made by all stakeholders. There
has to be strict monitoring and checks in the cyber world of
ours and strict liabilities to be imposed on intermediaries
who transmit or receive information and records from Cable
Landing System in India. There has to be a massive number
of awareness campaigns undertaken by Schools, Colleges
and Religious Institutions as well. Parents, Teachers,
Professors, Students and Public at large have to be apprised
of the laws against Pornography and its ill effects. We,
the Society after all has to be more vigilant about what is
happening with our children and also it is the duty and
responsibility of all stakeholders to protect our children and
society from the ill effects of Pornography.
Disclaimer – The views expressed in this article are the personal views of the author and are purely informative in nature.