The controversies surrounding YouTubers highlight the urgency for legal awareness and ethical standards in the age of content creation
With the rise of digital platforms, content creators, including YouTubers, influencers, and podcasters, have gained unprecedented access to large audiences. However, this digital revolution has also led to frequent legal violations, including obscenity, irresponsible journalism, and breaches of victim privacy in cases of sexual offences.
The recent controversies involving YouTubers Ranveer Allahbadia and Samya Raina have highlighted the misuse of digital platforms, ignorance of media ethics, and the need for stricter enforcement of obscenity laws. Indian laws such as the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act, and the Information Technology (IT) Act set clear boundaries for responsible digital behaviour.
The legal framework governing obscenity laws, victim privacy protection, media guidelines, and Supreme Court rulings on digital content aims to curb the misuse of social media by YouTubers and digital creators while maintaining the delicate balance between free speech and ethical journalism. These laws can be better understood by examining the relevant legal provisions below.
Laws Governing Digital Obscenity
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023
The Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, which replaces the Indian Penal Code (IPC), has retained and revised provisions related to obscenity and the protection of victims of sexual offences. Below is a detailed analysis of the relevant provisions:
- Section 294 – Sale, etc., of Obscene Books
Criminalizes the sale, distribution, or public exhibition of obscene material in any form, including books, drawings, paintings, or electronic content. Any content shall be deemed obscene if it is lascivious, appeals to prurient interest, or tends to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely to read, see, or hear it. Violators shall be punished with imprisonment of up to two years and a fine.
- Section 295 – Sale, etc., of Obscene Objects to Children
Whoever sells, hires, distributes, exhibits, or circulates any obscene object referred to in Section 294 to a child or attempts to do so shall be punished with imprisonment of up to three years and a fine.
- Section 296 – Obscene Acts and Songs
Whoever, to the annoyance of others, performs any obscene act, gesture, or utters any obscene song or ballad in or near a public place shall be punished with imprisonment of up to three months, a fine, or both.
- Section 72 – Disclosure of Identity of the Victim of Certain Offenses
Prohibits the disclosure of the identity or name of victims of rape or sexual assault in any form, including print, publishing, or electronic media. Any violator shall be punished with imprisonment of up to two years and a fine.
For more clarity, refer to the following Supreme Court judgment:
– Nipun Saxena v. Union of India (2018) – Held that even indirect disclosure, such as blurred images or initials, is punishable.
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012
- Section 23 – Procedure for Media
No person shall report on any child in any form of media, studio, or photographic facility without complete and authentic information. Such reports must not lower the child’s reputation or infringe upon their privacy.
Additionally, media reports must not disclose the child’s identity, including name, address, photograph, family details, school, or neighbourhood, which may lead to identification. Any violation shall be punishable with imprisonment of no less than six months, which may extend to one year.
- Section 13 – Use of a Child for Pornographic Purposes
Whoever uses a child in any form of media, including the internet or any printed/electronic form, for sexual gratification shall be guilty of using a child for pornographic purposes. Violators shall be punished with imprisonment of no less than five years and a fine.
Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act, 2015
Section 74 – Prohibition of Media Disclosure
Media, including newspapers, magazines, news-sheets, audiovisual platforms, and other communication forms, are prohibited from disclosing a child’s name, address, school, or any other identifiable details. Furthermore, they cannot publish a child’s photograph.
This prohibition applies to children in conflict with the law, in need of care and protection, or victims/witnesses of crimes. Any person who contravenes this provision shall be punished with imprisonment of up to six months, a fine of up to two lakh rupees, or both.
Digital Offenses and IT Act, 2000 Provisions
- Section 67 – Obscene Material in Electronic Form
Criminalizes the publication or transmission of obscene material in electronic form. Offenders shall be punished with imprisonment of up to three years and a fine of up to five lakh rupees.
- Section 67A – Sexually Explicit Content
Criminalizes the publication and transmission of material containing sexually explicit acts in electronic form. Offenders shall be punished with imprisonment of up to five years and a fine of up to ten lakh rupees.
For clarity, refer to:
– Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) – Clarified that freedom of expression is protected, but content violating decency and morality can be regulated under Article 19(2) of the Constitution.
Press Council of India (PCI) Norms of Journalistic Conduct
– Obscenity and vulgarity must be eschewed. Newspapers and journalists must not publish anything obscene, vulgar, or offensive to public good taste.
– Advertisements must not be vulgar or depict women in a nude or lewd posture as if they were commercial commodities for sale.
– The globalization and liberalization of media do not grant a license to misuse freedom of the press or lower societal values.
– The media has a duty to preserve and promote cultural heritage and social values rather than promote the “so-called popular permissiveness.”
The Need for Public Awareness
The incident underscores the ignorance of digital creators regarding laws on obscenity, victim privacy, and ethical journalism. Content creators must educate themselves on these legal aspects.
Workshops and legal literacy programs should be introduced for social media influencers, journalists, media houses, YouTubers, and podcasters.
Conclusion
The Ranveer Allahbadia and Samya Raina controversy is a stark reminder that freedom of speech on digital platforms comes with legal and ethical responsibilities. Laws such as the BNS, IT Act, POCSO, and JJ Act aim to curb obscenity, protect victim privacy, and ensure responsible digital journalism.
The Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, retains and strengthens provisions related to obscenity and victim protection. The penalties for obscene acts and victim privacy violations remain stringent, ensuring compliance by media, digital platforms, and individuals.
With the rise of digital content creation and social media misuse, these laws play a crucial role in preventing obscenity, protecting victim identities, and holding violators accountable. However, ignorance and misuse of these laws by content creators continue to pose challenges.
With the Supreme Court emphasizing stricter enforcement, digital platforms must adopt stronger content moderation policies. In the evolving digital landscape, ensuring legal compliance while preserving creative freedom remains a critical challenge.
The writer practices law at the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir High and Ladakh
Advocate Nasir ul Islam
ma************@***il.com