As cybercrime units grapple with AI-facilitated harassment, experts call for specific offences, better forensics, and stricter platform accountability to protect victims
Hadi Mushtaq Dar
As India moves toward a digitally linked future, a worrisome new front in cybercrime has emerged: the exploitation of intimate pictures and AI-generated deepfakes to invade privacy, embarrass individuals, and cause psychological pain. What was once considered minor mischief has quickly escalated into a major offence affecting regular residents and public personalities alike, creating significant concerns about legal preparation, victim protection, and societal views in the country.
The Rising Menace Of Non-Consensual Intimate Imagery
Revenge pornography has long caused pain for victims around the world. Official crime statistics in India provide a worrying look into this reality: the Crime in India 2022 report reported 6,896 cases of publishing or transmitting obscene or sexually explicit content, which encompasses the majority of revenge pornography and related cyber offences. Given extensive underreporting owing to stigma, the true figure is likely substantially higher.
The development of generative AI has aggravated the dilemma. Deepfakes, which are very realistic fake photos and videos created using artificial intelligence, now allow criminals to place victims’ faces on sexual material without any genuine recording ever being made. An estimated 90% of deepfakes worldwide are pornographic and disproportionately target women; research indicates that reports of cybercrime in India are progressively reflecting this trend.
Notable Incidents: From Celebrities To Ordinary Citizens
Across India, deepfake and revenge porn cases have made headlines for their audacity and impact. In October 2025, the Bombay High Court intervened in a deepfake case, Suniel Shetty v. John Doe & Ors., ordering the immediate removal of AI-generated videos that falsely depicted Bollywood actor Suniel Shetty making incendiary statements, underscoring how such content can threaten both personal reputation and public order. Punjab Police recently registered an FIR after a socially shared AI-generated obscene video falsely portrayed Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann, with investigations underway to trace the creator, an alarming example of how deepfakes can be weaponised for political or defamatory purposes. Long before these developments, cases such as the “Babydoll Archi” incident in Assam revealed how a man used AI tools to create and monetise explicit content using his ex-girlfriend’s likeness, drawing widespread media attention and legal action in 2020.
These cases illustrate that deepfake and revenge porn offences do not discriminate by class, gender, or profession; ordinary citizens, influencers, and public figures are all vulnerable.
Legal Framework And Its Limitations
India’s existing legal regime treats revenge porn and deepfake offences under a patchwork of provisions:
(a) Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000’s Sections 67, 67A, and 67B criminalise publishing sexually explicit material (including deepfake content) without consent and impose penalties including imprisonment and fines.
(b) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, also addresses digital impersonation and reputational harm under defamation provisions [Section 356(1) and (2)], voyeurism (Section 77), and cyberstalking (Section 78).
Despite these capabilities, Indian law lacks a particular, comprehensive offence that addresses the development, distribution, and malicious use of deepfake content. The lack of legal language designating “deepfakes” as a separate offence complicates quick prosecution and dilutes the deterrent effect. Civil rights organisations, such as the National Commission for Women (NCW), have advocated for the explicit criminalisation and improved monitoring procedures to protect victims’ rights and expedite investigations.
Towards A Victim-Centric Response
Recognising these problems, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India, implemented a 24-hour takedown rule for non-consensual intimate images (NCII) in November 2025. This standard operating procedure (SOP) requires intermediaries, such as social media platforms, to remove intimate or deepfake information within 24 hours of receiving a verified complaint. The rule also calls for coordinated action with law enforcement and hashing technologies to prevent the same information from being reposted. This initiative signals a fundamental shift away from reactive case-by-case removal and toward systematic prevention, recognising victims’ desire for immediate relief in the digital world.
Conclusion: Legal Reform And Social Awareness
As technology continues to outpace regulation, India stands at a crossroads in its response to revenge porn and deepfakes. Strengthening legal definitions, expanding forensic capabilities of cybercrime units, and building platforms’ accountability with enforceable standards are essential steps forward. Equally important is societal awareness: digital consent must become as sacrosanct as physical consent.
For victims navigating an often bewildering legal landscape, the message must be clear: The law is evolving to protect dignity in the digital age, but success will depend as much on enforcement as on public understanding and collective resolve.
The writer is a BA LLB from the School of Law, University of Kashmir
ha*********@***il.com