Overturning the decision of the Madras High Court, the Supreme Court has said that downloading and watching child porn is a crime. The court has advised the central government to write ‘Child Sexually Abusive and Exploitative Material (CSEAM)’ instead of child pornography in the POCSO Act. Let us tell you that the Madras High Court had quashed the case against a person saying that he had only downloaded child porn and did not send it to anyone.
The Supreme Court has said that by changing the words, the attention of the society and the justice system can be drawn towards the seriousness of such cases. Expressing concern over child porn, the bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala said that it is necessary to create a balance between technical reality and legal protection of children. The bench said that calling child porn as CSEAM will create a new approach to fight against child exploitation in the legal framework and society.
The bench had reserved its decision on April 19. The court had said that it is necessary to answer serious questions related to the law for the safety of children in the digital age. In January 2024, Justice N Anand Venkatesh of the Madras High Court granted relief to a 28-year-old man and quashed the criminal case against him. The youth was accused of watching and downloading child porn. Justice Venkatesh had said that merely watching child porn cannot be considered a crime under POCSO and IT Act.
According to him, if children are used in pornography, then a case can be filed against them under the POCSO Act. On the other hand, when someone watches child porn without being directly involved, then it is not right to file a criminal case against him. Citing Section 67B of the IT Act, the High Court had said that the accused has neither published such material nor sent it to anyone. When the accused has not used a child for porn, then the crime is not proved against him. However, it can be said that the youth has become morally degraded. During the hearing in March, the Supreme Court bench criticized this order of the High Court. The Supreme Court also raised questions on the legal understanding of the judge. The Supreme Court bench had said that how can a single judge say such a thing? This is frightening. During the hearing in April, the Supreme Court had said that accountability is also necessary regarding digital content.
