Digital Sexual Offences
📌 What Are Digital Sexual Offences?
Digital sexual offences refer to crimes that involve sexual harassment, abuse, or exploitation through digital means—including the internet, smartphones, apps, and other electronic platforms.
🚨 Common Forms of Digital Sexual Offences:
Non-consensual sharing of intimate images (aka revenge porn)
Cyberstalking or sexual harassment online
Deepfake pornography
Child sexual abuse material (CSAM)
Voyeurism using hidden cameras
Sextortion (threatening to publish private info/images)
⚖️ Legal Framework (Example: India & UK)
India:
Section 67, 67A of IT Act
Sections 354A–D, 376, 509 IPC
POCSO Act (for minors)
UK:
Sexual Offences Act 2003
Communications Act 2003
Voyeurism (Offences) Act 2019
Domestic Abuse Act 2021
🧾 Landmark Cases on Digital Sexual Offences
1. State v. Anvar P.V. (Kerala, India, 2014)
Facts: Involved use of digital evidence in a sexual assault case, where mobile messages and emails were submitted.
Issue: Whether electronic evidence is admissible without proper certification.
Ruling: Supreme Court clarified Section 65B of the Evidence Act—electronic evidence must be properly authenticated.
Takeaway: Critical for digital sexual offence cases—evidence must follow strict procedures to be valid.
2. R v. McGrath (UK, 2005)
Facts: The accused used covert webcams to record women in private spaces.
Charges: Voyeurism and digital intrusion under the Sexual Offences Act.
Ruling: Convicted; emphasized non-consensual recording is a sexual offence, even without physical contact.
Takeaway: Secret recordings are treated seriously—digital voyeurism = sexual offence.
3. R v. GS (UK, 2020)
Facts: Accused created deepfake pornographic videos using real women’s faces.
Ruling: Court found it amounted to image-based sexual abuse.
Takeaway: Even digitally altered sexual content can lead to criminal liability.
4. X v. Y (Delhi HC, 2022)
Facts: Victim’s private images were shared by ex-partner without consent.
Issue: Right to be forgotten and criminal charges under IPC and IT Act.
Ruling: Court ordered takedown, FIR registration, and stressed privacy and dignity as fundamental rights.
Takeaway: Sharing intimate images without consent is both a crime and rights violation.
5. State v. Michael Williams (USA, 2008)
Facts: Defendant posed as teen online to lure minors into sending nude images.
Ruling: U.S. Supreme Court upheld federal child pornography laws and online enticement statutes.
Takeaway: Online grooming + digital exploitation of minors = severe federal offence.
6. Kamlesh Vaswani v. Union of India (India, Ongoing PIL)
Issue: Demands regulation and blocking of pornographic websites, citing harm to women and children.
Outcome: Supreme Court directed government to develop blocking mechanisms and educate users.
Takeaway: Courts recognize the societal and individual harm from digital sexual content, even if not directly criminal.
📍 Summary Table
| Case | Jurisdiction | Type of Offence | Key Legal Principle |
|---|---|---|---|
| State v. Anvar P.V. | India | Use of digital evidence | Proper certification under Sec 65B is essential |
| R v. McGrath | UK | Digital voyeurism | Secret recording = sexual offence |
| R v. GS | UK | Deepfake pornography | Altered images still count as abuse |
| X v. Y | India | Revenge porn | Privacy & dignity protected by law |
| State v. Michael Williams | USA | Online grooming | Digital luring of minors = federal crime |
| Kamlesh Vaswani v. Union of India | India | Harm from digital porn | Courts push for regulatory frameworks |
⚖️ Key Legal Takeaways:
Consent is key — any sharing or capturing of intimate content without consent is a crime.
Digital evidence is powerful but must be handled correctly (e.g., certification under law).
Victims can demand takedown, FIR, and even constitutional remedies.
Tech-assisted offences like deepfakes and sextortion are legally actionable.
Minors are especially protected under child safety laws like POCSO or federal laws in the U.S.
RELATED Blog
0 comments