Mere Possession of Child Pornography Constitutes an Offence Under POCSO and IT Act, Rules High Court
In a significant judgment, the Karnataka High Court has upheld charges against Sri Binoj P.J. for the possession of child pornography, marking a crucial interpretation of legal provisions under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act). The court rejected the petitioner's plea that mere possession without transmission does not constitute an offence, aligning with the Supreme Court's interpretation that storage with the intent to transmit or share is punishable.
The judgment, delivered by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, emphasized that the POCSO Act's Section 15 and IT Act's Section 67B criminalize the mere possession or storage of child pornography if it is stored with an intention to share or transmit. This interpretation underscores the legislative intent to penalize preparatory acts in crimes involving child sexual exploitation.
The petitioner, whose mobile phone was found with child pornographic content during a forensic examination, contended that since the material was not transmitted, he should not be charged under these sections. However, the court, referring to a pivotal Supreme Court ruling in "Just Rights For Children Alliance v. S. Harish," held that the nature of these laws is to prevent not just the act of transmission but also the potential for such acts, thereby addressing the root of the problem.
The court's decision reflects a broader judicial approach to combat child exploitation by recognizing and penalizing preparatory actions that could lead to further offences. It signifies a shift towards a more stringent application of the law to deter the possession and potential dissemination of child pornography, affirming the comprehensive nature of the IT Act and POCSO Act in addressing various forms of child sexual exploitation.
Bottom Line:
The mere storage or possession of child pornography, even without transmission, constitutes an offence under Section 15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) and Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
Statutory provision(s): Section 15 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000
Sri Binoj P.J. v. State, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2862557
