The Supreme Court has held that children have a fundamental right to access and use the internet and protecting them from online harm cannot justify denying them access altogether [Just Rights for Children Alliance & Anr. v. S. Harish & Ors.].

A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran passed the order while issuing extensive directions to detect and remove child sexual exploitation and abuse material (CSEAM) online.

The Court said that internet access, as a fundamental right under Article 21 read with Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, is available to children as well as adults.

“We have no hesitation in saying that the right to access and use the internet is a fundamental right of every individual under Article 21 read with Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Our children, irrespective of their age enjoy the same rights, and to deny the same altogether would be as absurd as saying children below a certain age do not have a conscience worth protecting or a freedom of speech worth expressing. The safety of our children and their freedom are not at odds with each other. Our children are entitled to both,” the Court said in its order passed on 15 October.

The Court reasoned that measures intended to protect children must target harmful material and those responsible for it, rather than children themselves.

In cases involving CSEAM, the wrongdoers are those who create, circulate, sell or seek out such material, and intermediaries that fail to detect and remove it, the Bench said.

“To keep the child away from the internet on account of such failures would be to mistake the victim for the problem,” it added.

However, the Court went on to clarify that its opposition to blanket restrictions on children’s access to the internet did not rule out proportionate safeguards, including parental oversight, a dedicated child mode for social media accounts and restrictions on content inherently harmful to children.

The order was passed on a plea filed by NGO Just Rights for Children Alliance alleging continued lapses by intermediaries in tackling CSEAM following the Court’s September 2024 judgment.

Expressing concern over continued lapses, the top court said there appeared to have been “no progress worth the name” despite more than two years having passed since its earlier judgment. It referred to reports alleging paid promotion of CSEAM through redirect links and websites.

The Bench thus issued the following directions-

Guidelines for detection and removal of CSEAM: The Court directed the Central government to file an affidavit disclosing the technological measures deployed by intermediaries to detect and remove CSEAM.

It also directed the government to frame guidelines for all significant social media intermediaries on using hash-matching and URL listing to identify and remove such material.

National database to identify and remove verified CSEAM: The Court also directed the Centre to create a National Hash & URL List Database solely to detect and remove CSEAM.

It ordered that material undergo multiple levels of verification before inclusion, with the final assessment conducted independently by at least three trained human analysts. Once confirmed as CSEAM, its hash identifier and/or URL must be entered into the database.

The Court further directed intermediaries to immediately disable and remove content matching an existing entry, without awaiting further verification at their end.

Reporting and grievance redressal: The Court laid down several directions to strengthen the reporting and grievance redressal mechanisms for CSEAM complaints.

Among these, it required platforms to prominently display grievance officers’ details and make reporting accessible within two steps. Trained grievance officers must take the final decision on complaints, while automated tools may assist preliminary screening.

Proposed fines and scrutiny of paid content: The Court asked the Centre to consider exemplary fines for failures concerning CSEAM-related duties, taking account of the seriousness and recurrence of defaults and the intermediary’s size and turnover.

The Bench also said revenue derived from CSEAM or prohibited material offered through paywalls or subscriptions should be forfeited and disgorged. It required stricter scrutiny of subscription-based content and safeguards against children accessing harmful sexual material.

Digital safety and sex education in schools : The Bench directed that digital safety and age-appropriate sex education form part of the core curriculum, developed by NCERT and SCERTs in consultation with experts. Children must learn about consent, safe and unsafe touch, online exploitation and ways to report abuse without fear of reprimand.

The Bench also directed teacher training, regular awareness programmes for parents and free counselling and psychological support for victims for as long as necessary.

The Centre was directed to take implementation steps and file a progress affidavit before the next hearing on December 10.

Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta appeared for the Central government.

[Read Order]