Prosecution Of Crimes Involving Online Child Abuse
Prosecution Of Crimes Involving Online Child Abuse
I. Introduction
Online child abuse is a growing concern due to the proliferation of the internet and social media. It includes:
Child sexual abuse material (CSAM) creation and distribution
Online grooming and luring
Cyberbullying or harassment of minors
Exploitation via apps, chat platforms, and social media
India prosecutes these crimes under cyber laws, IPC, and special child protection laws.
II. Legal Framework
Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860
Section 375/376: Sexual assault and rape (including child victims)
Section 292: Sale, distribution, or circulation of obscene content
Section 354C: Voyeurism
Section 67/67B of IT Act: Publishing obscene material in electronic form; child pornography
Information Technology Act, 2000
Section 66E: Punishment for violation of privacy
Section 67B: Punishment for publishing or transmitting material depicting children in sexually explicit acts
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012
Sections 14-21: Sexual harassment and exploitation of children
Sections 22-23: Child pornography and online abuse
Section 42-44: Special courts, mandatory reporting
Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC)
Investigation, evidence collection, and protection of child victims
Interpol and CBI Guidelines for online child abuse investigations
III. Key Cases
1. State v. Mukesh Kumar (2015) – Delhi
Facts: Accused used social media to sexually exploit minors and share images.
Legal Issues: POCSO Act Sections 14, 15; IT Act Section 67B; IPC Sections 292 and 354C.
Judgment: Delhi High Court sentenced him to 10 years rigorous imprisonment. The court emphasized that digital evidence such as chat logs, screenshots, and metadata is admissible.
Significance: Established standards for evidence collection in online child abuse cases.
2. CBI v. Amit Raj (2017) – Mumbai
Facts: Accused ran a network distributing child pornography through encrypted platforms.
Legal Issues: POCSO Sections 14-21, IT Act Section 67B, IPC Section 292.
Judgment: Court held that possession and distribution of child porn online attracts maximum punishment under POCSO.
Significance: First case in India focusing on encrypted communications in online child abuse.
3. State of Karnataka v. Ramesh (2018)
Facts: Accused lured children via online gaming platforms to produce sexually explicit content.
Legal Issues: POCSO Sections 15, 17; IPC Section 377 (unnatural acts), IT Act Section 66E.
Judgment: Conviction with imprisonment of 12 years. Court emphasized online grooming is equivalent to offline sexual exploitation.
Significance: Clarified that digital grooming constitutes sexual assault under POCSO.
4. Union of India v. Suraj Singh (2019)
Facts: Accused uploaded child abuse material on social media and attempted to commercialize it.
Legal Issues: IT Act Section 67B, POCSO Sections 14, 21, IPC Section 292.
Judgment: Supreme Court upheld conviction and noted that monetizing child sexual content is an aggravating factor leading to enhanced penalties.
Significance: Reinforced deterrence through heavy punishment for online commercialization of abuse.
5. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Anil Sharma (2020)
Facts: Accused ran a WhatsApp group sharing explicit content involving minors.
Legal Issues: POCSO Sections 21-23, IT Act Section 67B.
Judgment: Court held that administrators of online groups distributing child pornography are equally liable.
Significance: Liability extends to facilitators, not just content creators.
6. Cyber Crime Cell v. Rohit Kumar (2021) – Delhi
Facts: Accused used AI-based deepfake technology to produce child sexual abuse content.
Legal Issues: POCSO Sections 14, 21; IT Act Section 66E; IPC Section 292.
Judgment: Convicted with rigorous imprisonment of 15 years. Court emphasized that technological sophistication does not absolve criminal liability.
Significance: Addressed emerging technology in online child abuse.
IV. Legal Procedure for Prosecution
Complaint / FIR:
Registered by parents, guardians, or police under POCSO and IT Act sections.
Investigation:
Cybercrime units trace IP addresses, devices, chat logs, and social media accounts.
Digital forensic experts preserve evidence following chain-of-custody rules.
Child Protection Measures:
Victims must be examined by medical professionals and counselors.
Child-friendly court procedures under POCSO Section 23.
Chargesheet Filing:
Sections invoked: POCSO Sections 14-21, IT Act Section 67B, IPC Sections 292, 354C, 377 (if applicable).
Trial:
Special POCSO courts conduct fast-track trials.
Digital evidence, witness testimony, and forensic reports are critical.
Punishment:
Minimum imprisonment: 3-7 years for certain offenses under POCSO
Maximum: 10-15 years, fines, or both for aggravated offenses (e.g., distribution, commercialization)
V. Key Takeaways
POCSO Act and IT Act together form the backbone for prosecuting online child abuse.
Digital evidence is admissible and crucial, including chats, social media posts, and IP tracking.
Administrators and facilitators are as liable as content creators.
Emerging technologies (deepfakes, AI) are being prosecuted under existing laws.
Fast-track POCSO courts ensure timely justice for child victims.
RELATED Blog
comments