Supreme Court Restores Criminal Proceedings in CSEAM Case: Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish
The Supreme Court of India set aside the Madras High Court judgment that had quashed the criminal proceedings against the accused and restored Special Sessions Case No. 170 of 2023. The case concerns alleged possession and storage of sexual-abuse material involving children and the scope of Section 15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
What the Supreme Court decided
The appeals were filed against the Madras High Court judgment that had allowed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and quashed the charge-sheet dated 19 September 2023. The charge-sheet alleged offences under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and Section 15(1) of the POCSO Act.
The Supreme Court held that the High Court had committed a serious error in quashing the proceedings. It therefore restored the criminal case to the Court of the Sessions Judge, Mahila Neethi Mandram (Fast Track Court), Tiruvallur District.
Key legal principles explained by the Supreme Court
The judgment examined the structure of Section 15 of the POCSO Act, the nature of possession and storage of CSEAM, and the circumstances in which conduct involving such material may attract penal consequences. It also considered the relationship between the POCSO Act and Section 67B of the Information Technology Act.
- Section 15 of the POCSO Act: provides a graded framework dealing with storage or possession of pornographic material involving a child, depending upon the statutory ingredients and purpose attached to the possession or storage.
- Section 67B of the Information Technology Act: deals with publishing or transmitting material depicting children in sexually explicit acts and related specified conduct in electronic form.
- CSEAM terminology: courts were directed to use "child sexual exploitation and abuse material" instead of the earlier expression because it more accurately describes the exploitation and abuse involved.
- Mandatory reporting: the Court emphasized the importance of Sections 19, 20 and 21 of the POCSO Act and cautioned against leniency where statutory reporting obligations are not discharged.
Facts leading to the case
On 29 January 2020, the All-Women Police Station, Ambattur, Chennai received information referring to a Cyber Tipline Report. An FIR was registered the same day as Crime No. 03 of 2020. During investigation, the respondent's mobile phone was seized and sent for forensic examination.
According to the prosecution material summarized in the judgment, the forensic examination reported two video files involving children and more than one hundred other pornographic video files stored on the device. After investigation, a charge-sheet dated 19 September 2023 was filed for alleged offences under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act and Section 15(1) of the POCSO Act.
The respondent then approached the Madras High Court under Section 482 CrPC. The High Court quashed the charge-sheet and the resulting criminal proceedings. The child-rights appellants challenged that decision before the Supreme Court.
Directions and recommendations concerning CSEAM
The Supreme Court made broader observations and recommendations aimed at strengthening child protection. Among other things, it recommended consideration of legislative change in terminology, directed courts to adopt CSEAM terminology, and emphasized education, awareness, victim support, early intervention, professional training and coordinated child-protection measures.
Current legal position and related provisions
The judgment arose from events and proceedings initiated before the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 came into force. Accordingly, the judgment records the High Court petition as having been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. For current criminal procedure, practitioners should also consider the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and its corresponding inherent-powers framework where applicable.
| Provision | Relevance |
|---|---|
| POCSO Act, 2012 - Section 15 | Provides graded punishment relating to storage or possession of pornographic material involving a child, subject to the statutory ingredients. |
| POCSO Act, 2012 - Sections 19-21 | Deal with reporting obligations and punishment for failure to report or record specified offences. |
| Information Technology Act, 2000 - Section 67B | Addresses specified electronic conduct involving material depicting children in sexually explicit acts. |
| Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 294-295 | Provide the present general penal framework concerning obscene material, including specified conduct involving children. |
| IT Rules, 2021, as amended | Impose due-diligence and complaint-handling obligations on intermediaries; the framework was further amended in 2026. |
Supreme Court's final order
The Supreme Court set aside the Madras High Court judgment and restored Special Sessions Case No. 170 of 2023 to the Sessions Judge, Mahila Neethi Mandram (Fast Track Court), Tiruvallur District. The Registry was also directed to forward copies of the judgment to the Ministry of Law and Justice and the Ministry of Women and Child Development for appropriate action.
Download the judgment
Download the locally hosted judgment PDF dated 23 September 2024.
Legal context reviewed and updated: 5 September 2026.