Introduction
Young people have the right to move freely, maintain friendships, spend time with people of their choice and live with dignity and privacy. Being seen with a friend, being in a relationship or spending time outside the home does not give strangers the legal authority to threaten, assault, humiliate or sexually harass them.
A recent incident in Jamui, Bihar, has brought these issues into public attention. On September 19, 2026, two Class 10 students, a boy and a girl, were allegedly stopped by a group while returning from an outing after coaching classes. Videos that later circulated online appeared to show the group surrounding the teenagers, assaulting the boy and physically and sexually harassing the girl. Police registered a case under provisions of the POCSO Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Three people have been arrested and an SIT has been formed to identify others allegedly involved.
The case also raised a separate privacy issue. Police have taken action against social-media accounts that circulated the video and allegedly revealed the identity of the minor girl. Reports on September 22 said a separate FIR had been registered against around 120 social-media profiles over circulation of the video. The incident highlights several legal protections that youngsters and their families need to understand.
Can Strangers Question or Harass Young People for Being Together?
There is no general legal authority for private individuals to stop, interrogate, threaten or assault two young people merely because they are together. Whether two people are friends, classmates or in a relationship does not by itself give members of the public the power to act as a private enforcement group. Any physical assault, use of criminal force, threat or sexual misconduct has to be assessed under the applicable criminal law.
In the Jamui case, the police invoked Section 74 of the BNS, which deals with assault or use of criminal force against a woman with the intention of outraging, or knowledge that the conduct is likely to outrage, her modesty. The provision carries imprisonment of not less than one year and up to five years, along with a fine.
Where the facts involve an attempt to remove a woman’s clothing or compel her to become naked, Section 76 BNS can also become relevant. It covers assault or criminal force used with the intention of disrobing or compelling a woman to be naked and carries imprisonment of three to seven years and a fine. The exact provision applicable to an accused depends on the conduct established during investigation and trial.
What Protection Does A Minor Have Against Sexual Harassment?
The legal position becomes particularly important when the person involved is below 18. Under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO), a child means a person below 18 years of age.
Section 8 POCSO provides punishment for sexual assault on a child. Sexual assault under the Act covers specified physical contact with sexual intent without penetration. Section 12 POCSO deals with sexual harassment of a child. Section 11 defines sexual harassment and includes conduct such as making sexually coloured remarks, showing pornography to a child, repeatedly following or watching a child, or repeatedly contacting a child with sexual intent. The provision can also cover conduct carried out through electronic or digital means.
This is why the age of the person involved matters significantly. Conduct that might otherwise be examined under general criminal law can additionally attract the special protections of POCSO when the victim is a child.
In the Jamui case, police have reported invoking Sections 8 and 12 of POCSO based on the allegations and material collected so far.
Can Someone Record And Share A Minor’s Harassment?
This is one of the most important lessons from the incident. The fact that a person records an incident does not automatically give that person the right to upload the footage online. When the footage identifies a minor victim of a sexual offence, additional legal protections apply.
Section 23 of the POCSO Act restricts disclosure of the identity of a child in media reports. This includes the child’s name, address, photograph, family details, school, neighbourhood or other information that can lead to identification. Contravention can attract imprisonment of six months to one year, a fine, or both.
The protection is not limited to a person’s name. A photograph, video or combination of details can potentially identify the child even when the person’s name is not written. This is particularly important on social media because users can unintentionally expose a victim by reposting the original video, adding identifying captions, tagging locations or showing the person’s face.
What Does The Juvenile Justice Act Say?
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 provides another layer of identity protection. Section 74 prohibits disclosure of information that can identify a child involved in an inquiry, investigation or judicial proceeding. It covers a child victim or witness as well as certain other categories of children covered by the Act.
The provision covers details such as the child’s name, address, school or other identifying particulars and also restricts publication of the child’s picture. Contravention can result in imprisonment of up to six months, a fine of up to ₹2 lakh, or both.
Therefore, when a video involving a minor victim is circulating online, simply writing “I am only sharing what is already viral” does not automatically remove the legal concerns surrounding the child’s identity.
Does A Minor’s Consent To A Relationship Remove POCSO Protection?
POCSO treats a person below 18 as a child for the purposes of the Act. The fact that two minors are friends or describe themselves as being in a relationship does not remove the statutory protections available to a child.
The important distinction is that POCSO addresses sexual offences against children, while the circumstances of a particular friendship or relationship are separate from the question of whether a specific act satisfies an offence under the Act.
Young people also need to understand that strangers, relatives, neighbours or online users cannot take the law into their own hands simply because they disapprove of a relationship.
What Rights Do Young People Have Online?
The Jamui incident also demonstrates that the harm can continue after the physical incident ends. A victim’s video can be downloaded, reposted, edited and circulated across multiple platforms within minutes. This can expose the victim to humiliation, harassment and long-term digital consequences.
For minors involved in sexual-offence cases, POCSO Section 23 and Section 74 of the JJ Act are particularly important because they protect the child’s identity and privacy. The government has also emphasised that the POCSO framework covers online sexual abuse and exploitation, while the IT Act and IT Rules provide additional mechanisms dealing with unlawful online material involving children.
This means a person who receives such a video also needs to think carefully before forwarding it. Downloading or forwarding a viral video involving a minor victim is not the same as helping the victim.
What Can A Young Person Do If Something Similar Happens?
A young person facing harassment, threats or assault can seek help from the police, a trusted adult, legal-aid services or child-protection authorities where applicable.
If the person is a minor, the POCSO framework provides special procedures for child victims. The child does not have to independently confront the alleged offenders or attempt to settle the matter through a group of people.
Where digital evidence exists, preserving relevant information such as the original message, account details, date and time can assist an investigation. At the same time, the victim’s photographs or videos do not need to be publicly reposted as “evidence.”
Conclusion
The Jamui incident has brought attention to an important legal principle, young people do not lose their legal rights because others disapprove of where they go, whom they spend time with or how they live their personal lives.
Where harassment, assault or sexual misconduct occurs, the law provides specific protections. When the victim is a minor, the POCSO Act and Juvenile Justice Act add further safeguards, particularly concerning sexual offences and identity protection.
The incident also demonstrates an increasingly important digital-rights lesson. A victim’s suffering does not become public property merely because someone recorded it. Sharing identifiable footage of a minor can create a separate legal problem.
