‘Don’t Watch, Don’t Store’: H.S. Phoolka warns child abuse material can lead to jail
Babushahi Bureau
New Delhi, August 17, 2026: Senior Advocate H.S. Phoolka has warned internet users against viewing or storing child sexual abuse material (CSAM), pointing to a 2024 Supreme Court judgment which held that knowingly viewing such material online can, in certain circumstances, amount to “possession” under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and attract criminal liability.
Phoolka issued the warning in a post on X on August 14 while commenting on the circulation of child sexual abuse material on social media platforms. He referred to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Just Rights for Children Alliance & Anr. v. S. Harish & Ors., decided on September 23, 2024.
“Don’t watch Child Sexual Abuse videos—those watching would be jailed and if Social Media platforms don’t report to police about the person watching videos, then even they will be prosecuted,” Phoolka said in his post, referring to the Supreme Court ruling.
The Supreme Court judgment examined the scope of Section 15 of the POCSO Act and Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, particularly in cases involving the storage, possession, viewing and transmission of material depicting sexual abuse of children.
One of the key findings was that physical possession of such material on a device is not always necessary to establish “possession”. The Court held that viewing such material over the internet can amount to constructive possession where the person knowingly exercises a sufficient degree of control over it.
The Court gave the example of a person who routinely watches such material online without downloading it. If the person knowingly exercises control over the material while viewing it, such conduct can fall within the concept of constructive possession under Section 15 of POCSO.
The ruling, however, turns on the circumstances and legal ingredients of the offence. The judgment discusses knowledge, control and the intention associated with the possession or handling of such material, meaning the law should not be reduced to the claim that every accidental encounter with illegal content automatically results in criminal liability.
The Supreme Court also made it clear that deleting the material later does not necessarily wipe out criminal liability. If it is established that a person had stored or possessed the material with the legally required intention, the fact that it was subsequently deleted does not by itself prevent proceedings under Section 15 of POCSO.
Section 15 itself deals with different forms of criminal liability relating to the storage or possession of child sexual abuse material. The Supreme Court explained that the provision covers distinct situations, including possession accompanied by an intention to share or transmit the material and possession for the purpose of transmitting, propagating, displaying or distributing it.
Phoolka also highlighted the responsibility of social-media intermediaries. In comments carried by IANS, he said platforms such as Meta and Telegram have a duty to act when such material comes to their notice, including blocking or removing it and reporting it to the authorities as required by law.
The Supreme Court’s 2024 judgment also examined the reporting obligations under Sections 19 and 20 of the POCSO Act and emphasised the role of society and other stakeholders in reporting offences involving children.
Also Read: Govt issues notice to Meta over Child Sexual Exploitative Material in Instagram ads; Watch Video
Also Read: Major crackdown on online child sexual abuse in Punjab; 2 held, 33 suspects identified