The Supreme Court rejected blanket age-based internet restrictions on children, holding that denying them access altogether would be unreasonable and could expose them to greater risks.
The court directed the Centre to frame guidelines for national hash and URL databases to improve cross-platform detection and removal of child sexual abuse material, with safeguards against wrongful deletion.
It called for stronger reporting mechanisms and school-level awareness programmes, stressing that child protection measures must not undermine constitutional freedoms.
The Supreme Court has rejected blanket age-based limits on internet access, saying children enjoy a constitutional right to go online while also calling for stronger safeguards against online sexual abuse.
The court said children’s safety and their freedom to use the internet were not in conflict. It ruled that denying internet access altogether would be unreasonable and ordered the Centre and online platforms to create a tougher system for faster detection and removal of child sexual abuse material across services.
The ruling comes after recent moves by the Centre to tighten rules on internet access for children under 18. The court made clear that child protection measures must not take away constitutional freedoms, even as it pressed for quicker action against abusive material and better reporting systems.
Age Limits Rejected
The court ruled out broad age-based curbs. It held that cutting off children from the internet altogether would be unreasonable. The court also warned that such restrictions could push children toward unregulated sites that may be even more dangerous.
The bench also pointed to a reporting problem. It observed that children who are enticed or threatened online may avoid telling parents or trusted adults if they fear punishment for breaking age-based restrictions.
The ruling follows recent policy moves in court. Two weeks ago, the Centre told the Supreme Court it intended to revise the IT intermediary rules so that access could be limited for those under 18. In the days before that hearing, the court also asked the Centre if under-18s should be prevented from opening social media accounts without parental consent.
Abuse Material Concerns
The court flagged a continuing failure. It voiced concern that child sexual abuse material was still circulating online despite existing guidelines. The court also criticised regulatory authorities and social media intermediaries for failing to take earnest steps to protect victims.
The proceedings were triggered in part by reports placed before the court. Those reports pointed to alleged paid promotions involving child sexual abuse material through redirect links and websites on social media platforms.
The court said the current reporting and removal system still relies largely on individual complaints. It noted that when one platform removes the material, the same content is not automatically flagged on other platforms. That can slow removal and let abusive content keep circulating online.
The court also made clear that it could not wait any longer for an effective response from authorities and platforms.
Hash Database Framework
The court issued detailed directions. It directed the Centre to frame guidelines for national databases of perceptual hashes and URLs to strengthen detection and removal of child sexual abuse material. The court said such databases would help platforms spot matching content across services and improve coordinated action.
At the same time, it warned against wrongful deletion. The court held that content must not be removed mechanically or added to a matching database on the basis of a single complaint, and that multiple safeguards and verification must come first.
It also directed that the framework include a grievance redressal mechanism for cases where a hash match or URL flag is incorrect. The court further clarified that these hash and URL databases must not be repurposed to detect or remove any other kind of material.
Awareness Push
The court also pressed for prevention. It called for extensive awareness programmes and sensitisation from the primary school level so children can understand online risks and seek help when they face abuse or threats.
The directions aim to check the circulation of abusive material while protecting children’s constitutional freedoms. The court held that systems meant to protect children should not result in arbitrary restrictions or wrongful removal of content.
The wider debate has been building. Earlier this year, Andhra Pradesh Minister Nara Lokesh said the state government was considering a ban on social media use by children under 16. His remarks came days after Australia introduced a similar ban on social media accounts for children there. gove healdines and strap
