Judicial Interpretation Of Online Consent Issues

08 Nov 2025 --
0 Comments

1. Introduction

With the rise of the internet and digital technologies, the concept of consent online has become central in areas such as:

Sexual harassment (sexting, revenge porn)

Data protection and privacy

Cyberstalking and online communication

Digital contracts and e-commerce

Judicial interpretation focuses on what constitutes valid consent, capacity to consent, and withdrawal of consent in an online context.

2. Key Principles of Online Consent

Explicit vs Implicit Consent

Explicit: Clear affirmative action (clicking “I agree”, sending a message).

Implicit: Actions inferred from behavior (use of website implies consent to terms).

Informed Consent

Users must know the consequences of sharing data or content.

Capacity to Consent

Age, mental ability, and coercion are critical.

Minors and vulnerable persons cannot give valid consent.

Revocation of Consent

Consent can be withdrawn, but the legal consequences depend on timing and nature of action.

📚 Case Laws on Online Consent Issues

Here are six important cases:

🧑‍⚖️ Case 1: State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti (2004) – Cyber Stalking & Consent

Facts

Suhas Katti sent obscene emails to multiple women and posted their personal information online without consent.

Victims complained of harassment and defamation.

Legal Issue

Can online consent be assumed when personal info is voluntarily shared in some contexts?

Whether posting private content online without consent amounts to criminal liability.

Judgment

Court held no consent was given for public dissemination.

Convicted under IT Act 2000, Sections 66, 66A (now struck down) and Sections 67 (obscenity).

Emphasized that online consent must be explicit and voluntary, not inferred.

🧑‍⚖️ Case 2: Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) – Free Speech & Consent Online

Facts

Challenge against Section 66A of the IT Act, which criminalized offensive messages online.

Legal Issue

Did sending or posting online content without recipient’s consent constitute an offense under Section 66A?

Balance between consent, free speech, and online harm.

Judgment

Supreme Court struck down Section 66A as unconstitutional.

Clarified that sending offensive content without consent can be penalized only if it causes specific harm.

Highlighted the need for explicit consent for private communication.

🧑‍⚖️ Case 3: S. v. M. (UK, 2017) – Sexting and Consent

Facts

A minor shared sexually explicit images online. The images were forwarded without consent.

Legal Issue

Whether online sharing of intimate images without consent constitutes child pornography and harassment.

Judgment

Court held lack of consent transforms voluntary sharing into criminal conduct.

Offender convicted for distributing images without permission.

Clarified that digital consent must be explicit and revocable.

🧑‍⚖️ Case 4: In Re: Aadhaar & Privacy Issues (Puttaswamy v. Union of India, 2018)

Facts

Issue of whether collecting personal data (biometrics) without user consent violated privacy.

Legal Issue

Is consent given by clicking through forms sufficient?

Judgment

Supreme Court emphasized informed consent is mandatory.

Consent must be clear, specific, and capable of withdrawal.

Online click-wrap or accept terms must genuinely inform the user.

🧑‍⚖️ Case 5: K.K. Verma v. Union of India (Delhi High Court, 2019) – Online Harassment

Facts

Victim harassed online through messaging platforms.

Perpetrator claimed consent because the victim had previously communicated voluntarily.

Legal Issue

Can prior voluntary communication imply ongoing consent?

Judgment

Court held consent must be ongoing and cannot be presumed.

Sending offensive messages after withdrawal of consent is punishable under IT Act and IPC (Sections 354, 509).

🧑‍⚖️ Case 6: Cyber Cell v. XYZ (Kerala High Court, 2021) – Non-Consensual Data Sharing

Facts

Personal chat messages and private photos were shared on social media without consent.

Legal Issue

Whether sharing private online content without permission violates IT Act and POCSO (if minor involved).

Judgment

Court held that any online act without explicit consent constitutes a criminal offense.

Reinforced legal principle: consent cannot be implied or assumed, especially for sensitive content.

📌 Summary of Judicial Interpretation

Principle	Judicial Insight
Explicit Consent	Must be affirmative; mere online presence is insufficient.
Informed Consent	Users must understand implications (Aadhaar case).
Revocable Consent	Withdrawal of consent must be respected (Shreya Singhal, K.K. Verma).
Consent of Minors	Never valid; criminal liability strict (S v. M, Kerala HC).
Data Sharing	Non-consensual sharing punishable (Kerala HC, Suhas Katti).