Formulate Programme To Educate Teenagers About Criminality Of Posting Intimate Content Online Without Consent: Delhi High Court To DSLSA

The Delhi High Court has asked the Delhi State Legal Services Authority to formulate a programme to educate students, potential vulnerable victims and teenagers about criminality of posting intimate content on social media platforms without consent of the person concerned.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma noted that in a large percentage of cases of sexual assault before the court, victims have alleged that inappropriate videos or photographs are made by one of the parties and minor girls are sexually abused under threat about posting them on social media.

“Therefore, in cases of sexual assault without consent or under some inducement, inappropriate videos and photographs are captured which are used for a long time for blackmailing the victims and continuing the sexual abuse. Even at times, this Court has witnessed cases where young boys have been sexually abused, assaulted and have been victims of such blackmailing,” the court said.

The court made the observations while denying bail to a man accused of raping a minor girl and later threatening her that he would post her pictures and videos on social media if she does not remain quiet.

The FIR was registered on the complaint of the prosecutrix under sections 328, 376 and 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. She also alleged that the accused again made physical relations with her and was also forcing her to marry him by changing her religion.

On the other hand, it was the accused’s case that the prosecutrix herself was in a consensual relationship and could not take a plea that she had been sexually assaulted.

The court denied him bail, observing that the accused was continuously threatening and blackmailing the prosecutrix, charges were not framed in the matter and the prosecutrix was yet to be examined.

“The record reveals that that applicant had not only made physical relations with her on the pretext of getting married to her and had continued to do so, but he had also videographed the same. Thereafter, he had kept on sexually assaulting her after threatening her that the photographs of their sexual relationship and videos of the same will be uploaded on the social media. The prosecutrix, therefore, in this case was put under threat of being defamed and embarrassed by posting the photographs and the video on the social media,” the court noted.

Justice Sharma also observed that the accused was using the photos and videos as a tool to threaten, socially shame, embarrass, defame and blackmail the prosecutrix to coerce her into sexual relationship.

“To sum up, had it been a case of consensual adolescent mutual love as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant, it would have no place of abusing, blackmailing, inducement, threat, violence, pressurising and threatening her to convert to his religion for the purpose of forcibly getting married to her even when she wanted to get out of the abusive relationship. She was put under fear and threat of social shaming of herself and her family, which does not indicate that it was a consensual innocent adolescent mutual love relationship,” the court said.

Justice Sharma also observed that it is duty of the court to ensure safety and security of the victim while deciding the grant or refusal of bail.

“It is essential to ensure the security and safety of the victims and witnesses since fair judicial decision making process has to ensure that the victims are able to appear before the Court and provide information and evidence fearlessly,” the court said.

It added: “In case there is material on record which points to the contrary and reflects that release of the accused could affect safety and security of the victims, and the victims have legitimate concerns about potential of the accused to threaten and harm him or her, it will be a key consideration while deciding a bail application.”

The court added that while the accused has a fundamental right of personal liberty, the Constitution of India gives right to life, liberty and security to the victim also.

“Since these constitutional rights are for the accused as well as for the victim, the Court while granting bail has to balance both their rights in the backdrop of the facts of the case and the judicial precedentsThe apprehension of such tampering, threats or violence has to be real and not vague,” the court observed. 

Title: SAKIB AHMED v. STATE NCT OF DELHI

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 396

Click Here To Read Order