The Delhi High Court on Thursday, August 20, declined to direct a ban or restrictions on children’s access to social media, holding that such measures fall within the Central government’s policy-making domain.
A bench of Justices V Kameswar Rao and Manmeet PS Arora disposed of a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Kirti Dua, a mother, and paediatrician Dr Sharad Gupta, which sought a ban on social media access for children below 13, tighter regulation for those aged 13 to 16, mandatory age verification and stronger action against Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM).
The Centre said the issue has wider implications and requires consultation with stakeholders, including social media platforms. The court directed the government to consider the PIL as a representation but did not impose a deadline for a decision.
Why The Court Said A Ban Is A Policy Decision
The petitioners argued that children’s unrestricted access to social media exposes them to harmful and sexually explicit content, cyberbullying, addictive platform features and other online risks that can affect their mental, emotional and physical well-being. Their plea sought a nationwide legal framework that would prohibit social media access for children under 13 and regulate access for those between 13 and 16.
It also proposed stronger age-verification mechanisms, parental safeguards and restrictions on harmful content. The petitioners argued that existing laws, including the Information Technology Act, the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, have not been sufficient to prevent children from encountering harmful material online.
The Centre told the court that deciding whether and how to restrict children’s access to social media would have wider ramifications and therefore required consultation with relevant stakeholders. The bench agreed that such a decision could not be imposed through a judicial direction. “It is not for a Court to give a direction that you should ban this, or that you should ban that,” the court observed, adding that the government should consider the views of stakeholders before arriving at a policy. The court also noted that a ban would represent the “ultimate relief”.
CSAM Concerns Continue
The hearing also highlighted the continuing challenge of Child Sexual Abuse Material being circulated online. The petitioners urged the court to ensure stronger action against such content and asked the government to take a prompt decision on their representation. Meta, one of the platforms involved in the case, told the court that it was already taking measures to detect and remove CSAM.
Its senior counsel said more than six lakh such posts were removed from Facebook and more than two lakh from Instagram last year, while the platforms’ proactive detection rate was around 99 per cent. However, the counsel acknowledged that harmful material can still evade detection and appear online despite these efforts.
The PIL had initially been brought before another Delhi High Court bench in July. It was filed by Kirti Dua, the mother of a three-year-old child, and Dr Sharad Gupta, a paediatrician. The petition named the Union government, several ministries, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and major technology companies including Meta, Google, Telegram, Snap and X as respondents. Justice Tejas Karia had recused himself when the matter was first listed, after which it was placed before the bench that heard it on August 20.
The Logical Indian’s Perspective
Children deserve meaningful protection online, but protecting them from digital risks is unlikely to depend on a single ban or a court order. The debate needs to bring together parents, children, educators, child-rights experts, technology companies and policymakers to find safeguards that are effective without unnecessarily restricting access to information and communication.
Stronger age verification, quicker removal of CSAM, transparent platform accountability and better digital education could form part of a wider child-safety framework. The High Court has now placed the responsibility with the Centre, making consultation and eventual policy action particularly important. What kind of safeguards do you think India should introduce to make social media safer for children while protecting their right to learn, connect and participate online?
Also Read: India’s Air Travel Boom Hits Turbulence As Domestic Passenger Traffic Plunges 4.8% In July
The Delhi High Court says it is for the government to decide whether to ban or restrict children’s access to social media, and the court cannot intervene on its own.
— IANS (@ians_india) August 20, 2026
The court declined to entertain a petition seeking to keep children away from social media and curb child sexual… pic.twitter.com/uR4pnowoNA
