On 28th September (Monday), the Supreme Court pronounced that social media companies that allow minors to create accounts on their platform must abide by the law of the land and instructed the central government to address the issue within its legal framework, failing which it will issue a directive.
The decision was delivered by a bench led by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohan during the hearing of a public interest lawsuit (PIL) brought by the nonprofit group Just Rights for Children Alliance (JRCA).
“How can these platforms allow 12 to 13-year-olds to have accounts? It is contrary to the law of the land,” the court questioned. It asked the government to pass instructions under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 to ensure that the intermediaries comply with the country’s laws.
The petition emphasised the necessity of implementing measures to prevent minors from creating or managing accounts on social media networks such as Instagram and X (formerly Twitter).
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the centre, outlined that any such action would need legislative support and that guidelines by themselves would not be adequate, seeking time to respond. He agreed that agreements made by minors with social media intermediaries were void contracts that should be averted.
He informed that India’s privacy law, the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, might already address the matter, adding, “Some provisions have been given to me. I would like to examine whether it is in fact covered. Otherwise, it’s a genuine grievance.” He also mentioned, “If a person is less than 18 years old, consent can be given by parents, as there are educational apps that require the user’s consent.”
On the other hand, Senior Counsel HS Phoolka, the petitioner’s attorney, conveyed that the DPDP Act is anticipated to take effect in 2027. Mehta agreed, remarking that the government could be contemplating enacting similar rules under different legislation. Instead of restricting the safeguards to voluntary recommendations, the court asked about incorporating them into the statutory framework governing intermediaries.
Justice Bagchi highlighted, “A 15-year-old child can have a Twitter account,” the court said. According to him, social media companies should make sure that the 18-year-old minimum age requirement is not violated by their membership policies. “They must restrict, at least in registering membership, to a minimum threshold of 18 years,” he insisted.
Bagchi noted, “They have registered under the laws of the US and imported into the Indian digital space the restrictions which are applicable in the US, which is impermissible under Indian law.” He told Mehta, “Please pass directions under the intermediary rules that they fashion their software, or whatever the platform is called, in conformity with Indian law. The software has to conform with Indian law. That is our request.”
Mehta expressed, “They have to comply with Indian law; there is no doubt about that. Something can be done, something should be done and will be done. We have to come back,” he assured, remarking, “We will have to control intermediaries.”
CJI Kant pointed to Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, which offers intermediaries safe-harbour protection for third-party content. He asserted that the court might need to step in if the matter is not appropriately handled. He stressed, “We will be compelled to issue directions by invoking that provision against all these intermediaries,” to which Mehta responded, “No, my lords, the government is ready to do that.”
Mehta also mentioned, “Membership of educational websites can be taken through consent of parents.” He promised that the centre will make it legally required for intermediaries to prevent minors from opening social media accounts. Mehta stated that intermediaries are going to have to adhere to Indian regulations, and the restriction would need to be included in legislation or rules.
Speaking on behalf of JRCA, HS Phoolka contended that exposing kids to social media poses a number of concerns. According to the petition, the dangers to children’s safety, dignity, development, and well-being included online grooming, sexual exploitation, trafficking, behavioural profiling, abuse of personal data, cyberbullying, and exposure to age-inappropriate content.
The matter was brought to the court’s attention earlier this month. It announced, “There is a need for some safeguards in India,” on 10th September 10 in a notification in relation to the petition, adding, “Some firewalls are necessary for protecting our children.”
The growing threat of CSAM
OpIndia’s “Chapter 1 Magazine” has already provided a comprehensive breakdown of how child sexual abuse material (CSAM), which is easily accessible on major social media platforms, poses a massive threat to the younger generation. Minors have become easy targets for paedophiles and predators on these sites.
Furthermore, India ranks among the top destinations for CyberTipline reports. In 2025, NCMEC (National Centre for Missing & Exploited Children) received 21.3 million CyberTipline reports. 29.4 million photos and 26.3 million films were among the 61.8 million photographs, videos, and other items found in electronic service provider reports.
Meanwhile, even AI-generated visuals are employed to threaten, humiliate or blackmail an identifiable child. The authorities in India are making concerted efforts to pursue the accused and bring them to justice. Nevertheless, the continuous exposure of children to risks through online platforms remains a significant and persistent obstacle.
