What Does Section 67A of the IT Act State?
“Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form any material which contains sexually explicit act or conduct shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees and in the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees.”
This provision was introduced to address the growing issue of pornographic and sexually explicit material circulating through digital platforms. It makes publishing, transmitting, or even helping to transmit such content in any electronic form a serious criminal offence.
Why Was Section 67A Introduced?
The rise of the internet and smartphones led to a surge in sexually explicit videos and content being uploaded or shared online. Before Section 67A, the IT Act only had Section 67, which punished the publication of obscene material. However, that section did not adequately cover sexually explicit acts, acts showing real or simulated sexual conduct.
To fill this gap, Parliament inserted Section 67A through the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. It aims to curb the creation, distribution, and sharing of pornographic content and protect digital spaces from sexual exploitation and abuse.
How Is Section 67A Different from Section 67?
Section 67 covers any obscene material that tends to deprave or corrupt viewers, such as vulgar or indecent images. Section 67A, however, specifically targets material that contains actual sexually explicit acts or conduct.
For instance, an obscene joke or lewd photo might fall under Section 67. But a video showing real or simulated sexual activity falls under Section 67A. Hence, the punishment under Section 67A is stricter because it deals with more serious and exploitative content.
What Are the Punishments Under Section 67A?
Section 67A imposes stringent penalties to discourage the publication or sharing of explicit content.
- For the first conviction, the punishment can extend up to five years in prison and a fine up to ₹10 lakh.
- For subsequent convictions, imprisonment may extend to seven years along with a fine up to ₹10 lakh.
This makes Section 67A one of the toughest provisions in the IT Act, reflecting the law’s intention to deter people from circulating or producing explicit digital material.
What Must the Prosecution Prove?
For a conviction under Section 67A, the prosecution must clearly prove that the accused published, transmitted, or helped in the transmission of material showing sexually explicit acts or conduct.
Mere obscenity or vulgarity does not meet this threshold. The content must involve real or simulated sexual activity. Courts have often emphasized that the standard of proof must be high, and the content must clearly fall within the scope of the section.
What Did the Supreme Court Say in Sharat Babu Digumarti v. NCT of Delhi?
In Sharat Babu Digumarti v. NCT of Delhi (2017) 2 SCC 18, the Supreme Court clarified the application of Section 67A. The case involved the sale of an obscene video clip through an online platform.
The Court held that liability under Section 67A can arise only when a person is directly responsible for publishing or transmitting the content. Simply being a part of a platform where such content is hosted is not enough unless the person had active involvement.
This case drew a distinction between the liability of content creators or transmitters and that of intermediaries (like websites or hosting platforms), which are protected under Section 79 of the IT Act if they follow due diligence.
How Did the Court Address Online Pornography in Kamlesh Vaswani v. Union of India?
In Kamlesh Vaswani v. Union of India (2013), a public interest litigation was filed seeking a complete ban on pornography in India. The petitioner argued that easy access to sexually explicit content online promoted immorality and crime.
The Supreme Court acknowledged the seriousness of the issue but emphasized that a complete ban on adult pornography might affect personal liberty under Article 21. However, the Court directed the government to block websites hosting child pornography and sexually explicit content under Sections 67A and 67B of the IT Act.
The case led to stronger monitoring of internet content and reinforced the importance of Section 67A in controlling explicit digital material.
What Is the Role of Section 67B and Section 67C?
While Section 67A focuses on adult sexually explicit material, Section 67B deals with sexually explicit acts involving children, such as child pornography. It carries even harsher penalties due to the nature of the offence.
Section 67C, on the other hand, obligates intermediaries (such as internet service providers and social media platforms) to retain data and cooperate with investigations related to such offences. Together, these provisions form a comprehensive framework against online sexual exploitation.
Are There Any Defences or Exceptions?
The law does not punish every form of depiction of sexuality. Exceptions exist for content created or shared for artistic, educational, or scientific purposes, provided there is no intention to corrupt or exploit.
For instance, medical or academic discussions on human sexuality, films certified by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), or legitimate artistic expression may not attract Section 67A. However, the intention and context are crucial in determining whether the act constitutes an offence.
What Is the Impact of Section 67A on Social Media and Digital Platforms?
With the explosion of digital communication, social media platforms have become a key battleground for regulating explicit content. Platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, and Telegram often face challenges in moderating explicit videos and images.
Section 67A ensures that both individuals and intermediaries act responsibly. Intermediaries are required to remove or disable access to such content once notified by authorities. Non-compliance can make them liable under the IT Act.
However, courts have also ruled that mere “liking,” “sharing,” or “viewing” of a post without intent to publish or transmit does not attract criminal liability. The Allahabad High Court clarified this in Vineet Kumar v. State of U.P. (2025), stating that simple engagement without active transmission does not amount to publishing under Section 67A.
How Do Courts Interpret the Term “Sexually Explicit”?
Courts interpret “sexually explicit” as depicting actual or simulated sexual acts in a manner that appeals to prurient interests. The content must cross the line from mere obscenity to active portrayal of sexual conduct.
Judges often rely on community standards and precedents to assess whether a material qualifies as sexually explicit. In doing so, they balance the protection of public morality with freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a).
Why Is Section 67A Important in Today’s Digital Age?
Section 67A remains vital in safeguarding individuals, especially women and minors, from online sexual exploitation. It helps curb revenge porn, non-consensual video sharing, and digital blackmail, crimes that have become common with smartphone use.
The provision empowers law enforcement to act swiftly against offenders and serves as a deterrent for those attempting to misuse technology for sexual exploitation or commercial gain.
For any specific query call at +91 – 8569843472
Conclusion
Section 67A of the IT Act stands as a cornerstone in India’s fight against digital obscenity and sexual exploitation. It distinguishes between mere obscenity and explicit sexual conduct, ensuring that those responsible for producing or sharing such content face severe consequences.
Through key judgments like Sharat Babu Digumarti and Kamlesh Vaswani, Indian courts have clarified the scope and intent of the law while balancing it with constitutional freedoms.
In a world where online media shapes behavior and access to explicit content is only a click away, Section 67A plays a crucial role in protecting digital ethics and public morality. It sends a strong message that the internet is not a lawless space, accountability follows every upload, share, and transmission.
