Madras High Court urges women in relationships not to share intimate images

The Madras High Court has written an advisory in English, Tamil and Hindi asking young girls and women not to share intimate photographs or videos electronically, irrespective of the affection, trust or assurances of confidentiality by their partners.

A Bench of Justices N Anand Venkatesh and KK Ramakrishnan included the three-language advisory in a judgment affirming the conviction and life sentence of a convict in a rape and blackmail case.

“A moment of misplaced trust should never become a lifetime of suffering,” the judges said.

The Court said that once an intimate photograph or video leaves a person’s exclusive control, it can easily be misused.

Such misuse could cause irreversible damage to the victim’s privacy, dignity and mental well-being, it added.

The Court emphasised that preventive measures should be preferred over undergoing a difficult process of seeking legal remedies later.

The advisory referred to the recognition of privacy and modesty as integral elements of human dignity from the beginning of human civilisation.

It invoked the Biblical account of Adam and Eve covering themselves with leaves as a symbolic reflection of the human instinct to preserve privacy and modesty.

The Court said clothing has evolved from being a physical necessity to becoming an essential attribute of human dignity and social order.

However, the Bench added that unscrupulous persons in digital era were exploiting the trust and emotional vulnerability of young girls and women.

Victims are induced through deception, false promises or emotional manipulation to share intimate material, the judges said.

After obtaining such material, offenders could threaten to publish it on social media or other digital platforms, the Court added.

This exposes victims to continued exploitation, humiliation and psychological trauma, the Court flagged.

Thus, the judges urged women to exercise the “utmost caution” while safeguarding their privacy and dignity in the digital world.

The Court clarified that its broader appeal against technology-enabled exploitation was relevant not only to women but to all members of society who could become victims.

The Court requested print, electronic and digital media to widely publicise the advisory in the larger public interest.

It made the observations while deciding convict Kasi’s appeal against his conviction for repeatedly raping and blackmailing a woman whom he had contacted through Facebook.

The prosecution said Kasi gained the woman’s confidence by promising employment and marriage. He subsequently sexually assaulted her, secretly recorded intimate material and threatened to circulate it on social media if she refused to submit to his demands.

The Bench described the case as a “classic illustration” of romance fraud, rape by deception and sexual extortion. It upheld Kasi’s sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life.

In a concurring postscript, Justice Venkatesh also highlighted the vicarious trauma suffered by investigators, lawyers and judges required to examine graphic digital evidence.

He called for psychological screening, counselling, decompression protocols and rotation of personnel handling such material.