E-Paper
Govt eyes officers in each city to act on ‘revenge porn’
The court is hearing a petition filed by a woman advocate whose private videos were allegedly recorded and circulated by a former partner
Days after the Madras High Court directed the Union government to evolve a mechanism for women to have their private images and videos uploaded online without consent removed from the internet, the Centre informed the court on Tuesday that it is considering appointing a chief information security officer (CISO) in every Indian city to tackle cybercrime threats and online content violations targeting women.
The submission came in response to justice N Anand Venkatesh’s call for a concrete system to address the growing problem of non-consensual intimate media being disclosed. The court is hearing a petition filed by a woman advocate whose private videos were allegedly recorded and circulated by a former partner, leaving her traumatised after the content appeared on pornographic websites, messaging applications, and social media websites.
Senior counsel A Kumaraguru, representing the Union ministry of home affairs, informed the court that Union home secretary Govind Mohan had flagged the urgent need for designated CISOs in every city earlier this month. These officers would supervise cyber complaint response units, coordinate helplines for victims, ensure immediate takedown of objectionable content, conduct regular security audits, and proactively counter emerging digital threats.
Justice Venkatesh welcomed the proposal but raised concerns about the psychological toll on officers. “What will this do to his mental health? An officer whose only job from morning to evening is to sift through objectionable content. It can impact his mental well-being too. It is like judges constantly handling family court cases—the mind either breaks down or becomes desensitised,” the court observed.
The judge insisted on a standard operating procedure (SOP) to ensure uniformity and objectivity in handling such complaints, granting the Centre time until August 5 to present the framework. The home ministry informed the court that an SOP is being prepared in consultation with the women and child development ministry, which must also outline preventive measures to ensure removed content does not resurface.
On July 15, the court had directed the Centre to create a “prototype system to address such complaints efficiently” and explore appointing nodal officers for grievance redressal. “Technology is always there. What is required is the inclination to put it to use for the benefit of the common man,” justice Venkatesh had said, observing that authorities act swiftly only when the victim is “powerful.”
The petitioner’s lawyer, senior advocate Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam, pointed out that although the ministry of electronics and information technology had complied with the court’s earlier direction to block certain sites, the same content kept reappearing across platforms. The court responded by urging deployment of tools such as PhotoDNA and artificial intelligence-based technology to ensure permanent removal of such material.
During Tuesday’s hearing, the court recorded that 22 objectionable videos featuring the petitioner had been taken down, though six remained online. The Union government assured the bench that these would also be removed shortly.
Justice Venkatesh, who had earlier disclosed his intention to meet the petitioner in chambers to offer courage and solidarity, continued emphasising the need for institutional empathy. “We have to look at this from a woman’s standpoint alone. When a man appears in such videos, nothing happens. It does not impact his image or life. No one goes after him,” the judge remarked.
In an earlier hearing on July 9, the court had ordered the information technology ministry to remove all private non-consensual content relating to the woman within 48 hours. It also made the state director general of police a party to the case, noting the lack of responsiveness to the woman’s June 18 representation seeking urgent intervention.
Justice Venkatesh criticised Tamil Nadu police for mishandling the investigation, questioning how the woman’s name appeared in the FIR and why she was made to sit with several male officers to watch her own private videos for identification purposes.
The high court has since directed police to redact the woman’s name from all official records and asked the State Public Prosecutor to personally ensure that police officers receive appropriate training in dealing sensitively with survivors of sexual violence. On Tuesday, the Tamil Nadu government informed the court that the redactions had been completed.
