India today stands in a troubling paradox. Its legal framework addressing child sexual abuse material (CSAM) is increasingly stringent, courts have clarified criminal liability, and specialised cyber units are expanding enforcement. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 criminalise the production, distribution, and possession of exploitative material involving minors, while the Supreme Court in Just Rights for Children Alliance v S. Harish (2024) clarified that even viewing such material constitutes a punishable offence. Yet the circulation of CSAM across mainstream digital platforms continues with alarming ease, revealing a regulatory model that remains fundamentally reactive while abuse ecosystems evolve faster than the law.

The Expanding Digital Ecosystem of CSAM

Globally, according to UNICEF, approximately 80% of children across 25 countries feel unsafe from sexual abuse or exploitation online, underscoring the cross-jurisdictional scale of the problem. At the same time, new technological vectors including the proliferation of AI-generated abuse imagery are accelerating harm. In 2025, the UK-based Internet Watch Foundation reported a 26,362% rise in photorealistic AI videos of child sexual abuse, often involving real and identifiable victims, compared to the previous year.

Studies show perpetrators use encryption and hidden networks to conceal CSAM circulation. Analysis of Dark Web forums shows persistent and growing activity in illicit material distribution that resists traditional takedown mechanisms, such as notice and takedown systems used by online platforms to remove illegal content after it is reported, and behavioural patterns indicate entrenched user communities facilitating exchange and consumption. Over the past few years, India like many countries has seen an alarming surge in the circulation of CSAM across digital platforms. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) issued notices to the Centre, States, and Union Territories in May 2023 over a 250-300% reported increase in CSAM on social media in India.

Law in Action: Enforcement and Judicial Clarification

The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 criminalises using children in sexual material and covers production, distribution, and possession of such content. Complementing POCSO, the Information Technology Act, 2000, especially Section 67B, penalises the electronic publication or transmission of material depicting minors in sexually explicit acts. Indian intermediaries are required under the IT Rules to act promptly to remove illegal content upon receipt of notice, and the government has emphasised proactive measures. In 2023, notices issued by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to platforms including X, YouTube, and Telegram explicitly require removal of CSAM and warned that failure to comply may result in forfeiting of their safe-harbour protections (the conditional immunities granted to online intermediaries under Section 79 of the IT Act). Recent judicial intervention has clarified the scope of this protection. In Just Rights for Children Alliance v S. Harish (2024), the Supreme Court overturned the Madras High Court’s narrower interpretation and held that viewing, storing, and possessing “child pornography” is punishable under the POCSO Act. This decision aligns the law more closely with global child protection standards under the Convention on the Rights of the Child and related UN instruments.

Regulatory Gaps

India’s approach to CSAM still reacts after harm happens instead of stopping risks at a systematic level. Laws punish offenders after content spreads and platforms usually act only after someone reports it, while encrypted apps, fast sharing, and foreign servers allow abusive material to move much quicker than authorities can respond. Platforms are compelled to remove illegal content on notice, but there is no uniform obligation for proactive detection and prevention, especially on encrypted or semi-closed messaging platforms where much of the circulation now occurs.

Earlier enforcement successes in Telangana reveal the scale of the crisis: by 2025, a dedicated Child Protection Unit reportedly helped the bureau detect and act on hundreds of CSAM cases, with hundreds of arrests tied to encrypted messaging services and dormant websites. This underscores how encrypted and privacy-oriented platforms are being used to disseminate CSAM at scale. Yet expanding surveillance or weakening encryption undermines privacy and digital rights. Effective child protection therefore requires shifting from reactive enforcement toward preventative digital governance, platform accountability, cyber-forensic capacity and international cooperation.