Chennai The Madras High Court on Tuesday directed the Union Government to appoint a nodal officer to handle grievance redressal related to the non-consensual uploading of women’s private images and videos on the Internet.
The court emphasised the need for a simple and effective mechanism that would enable victims to have such content removed swiftly, without compromising their identity.
Justice N. Anand Venkatesh issued the order while hearing a writ petition filed by a woman advocate, who alleged that her former partner had secretly recorded intimate moments without her knowledge and shared them online.
The petitioner said the images and videos had subsequently appeared on pornographic websites, causing her severe trauma.
The court instructed senior Central government panel counsel A. Kumaraguru to take directions from the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) and to begin work on developing a prototype redressal system that would help victims easily report and remove such content from digital platforms.
Appearing for the petitioner, senior counsel Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam told the court that despite an interim order passed on July 9, 2025, directing the blocking of websites displaying explicit content, the same material continued to resurface online.
He said that MeitY had complied with the initial order, but rogue websites had reappeared and continued to violate the petitioner’s privacy.
Observing that the real issue lies in the lack of will rather than technology, Justice Venkatesh remarked, “The technology is always there, but what is required is the inclination to put it to use for the benefit of the common man.”
He said that when the victim is a person of influence, such as the daughter of a minister or judge, authorities act swiftly and decisively, but fail to show the same urgency when the victim is a common citizen.
The judge stressed the need to harness tools like photo DNA tracking to curb the repeated uploading of sensitive material and to ensure that women do not continue to suffer in silence.
Justice Venkatesh also criticised the police for naming the petitioner in the First Information Report (FIR) filed against her former partner.
He ordered that her name be redacted immediately, calling the disclosure a gross violation of her right to privacy.
He further condemned the manner in which the police made the woman watch the explicit videos in the presence of seven male officers as part of the investigation.
“Don’t you have women police personnel trained in cybercrime? How can you make the victim sit with seven male officers to view such videos? Isn’t this a violation of her dignity?” he asked.
Asserting that crimes against women must be investigated with sensitivity and care, the judge summoned State Public Prosecutor Hasan Mohamed Jinnah to appear at the next hearing to ensure that appropriate instructions are issued to the police department on handling such cases with empathy and discretion.
(IANS)
