Supreme Court directs a national hash-database and tighter intermediary duties on child abuse material
The Supreme Court has passed detailed follow-up directions in Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, its 2024 ruling on child sexual exploitation and abuse material (CSEAM) circulating on social media. Noting that intermediaries had made little progress since that judgment, the Court directed the Union of India to create a National Hash & URL List Database for detecting and removing CSEAM, with every entry to be confirmed as CSEAM by at least three trained human analysts before it is added. Intermediaries must immediately remove any content matching a database entry of 'known origin,' and must otherwise verify and remove content of 'unknown origin' under the IT Rules, displaying a notice in place of removed material and offering a grievance-redressal route.
On reporting, the Court held that an intermediary's compliance with Section 79 of the IT Act does not excuse it from also reporting CSEAM to the Special Juvenile Police Unit or local police under Section 20 of the POCSO Act and Rule 11 of the POCSO Rules, in addition to any report to the US-based NCMEC; failing this due diligence strips the intermediary of the 'Safe Harbour' protection under Section 79. The Union of India was directed to frame guidelines, amend the IT Rules where necessary, and file a compliance affidavit by the next hearing on 10 December 2026.
Quick checkAccording to the Supreme Court in Just Rights for Children Alliance v. S. Harish, an intermediary that detects and removes child sexual abuse material but fails to report it to the Special Juvenile Police Unit as required under the POCSO Rules:- Retains its Safe Harbour under Section 79 of the IT Act regardless
- Loses the Safe Harbour protection under Section 79 of the IT Act
- Is automatically prosecuted under Section 67B of the IT Act
- Must only report to NCMEC and need not inform Indian police
Show the answer ↓
Answer: B. The Court held that compliance with Section 79 of the IT Act does not excuse an intermediary from also complying with the mandatory reporting duty under Section 20 of the POCSO Act and Rule 11 of the POCSO Rules; failing this due diligence strips it of the Safe Harbour.
Issued by Supreme Court of India. If this summary and the source differ, the source is right — tell us and we will correct it.
Revising the month? All 108 legal updates from October 2026 →