Watching, downloading child porn not an offence: HC
Merely watching and downloading child pornography will not be an offense under Pocso and Information Technology Act, 2000, wrote Justice N Anand Venkatesh.
Madras High Court (File)
CHENNAI: Stating that merely watching and downloading child pornography is not an offense under the law, including the Pocso Act, the Madras High Court (MHC) quashed the criminal proceedings against a 28-year-old youth.
Merely watching and downloading child pornography will not be an offense under Pocso and Information Technology Act, 2000, wrote Justice N Anand Venkatesh.
Due to accessibility of sexually-explicit material on the internet, porn addiction is a growing concern in teenagers. “With the click of a button they’re be exposed to endless pages of adult content. There used to be addiction in smoking, drinking, etc., but now there is a growing rise in addiction watching porn photos or videos,” read the judgment.
Further, the judge also mentioned a study that 9 out of 10 boys and 6 out of 10 girls are exposed to some form of pornography before the age of 18. “GenZ kids (born between 1995-2010) are grappling with porn addiction. Instead of damning and punishing them, the society must be mature enough to properly advise and educate them and try to counsel them to get rid of it,” the judge wrote. “The education must start from the school level since exposure to adult material starts at that stage itself.”
A petitioner, S Harish moved the MHC, seeking to quash the criminal proceedings against him pending before the Mahila court, Tiruvallur. Based on the letter from the Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (crime against women and children), Ambattur police booked Harish for downloading child porn, under Sections 67-B of IT Act, 2000 and 14 (1) of Pocso, 2012. Since the case was pending before the Mahila court, Harish moved MHC for relief.
Harish admitted that he would watch pornography as a teenager. But he also submitted that he had never watched child porn and never attempted to publish or transmit any them to others. The petitioner said that he merely downloaded the porn content and watched it in privacy, and that he cannot continue with porn addiction anymore and will seek counselling to manage it.
Recording the submission, the judge wrote that the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioner will amount to abuse of process of court, which will be a stumbling block for his career in future. So, the judge quashed the criminal proceedings against him.
