Delhi High Court: In a writ petition raising concerns regarding the protection of children from potential harms associated with social-media access and inappropriate online content and seeking directions to the Union of India and other authorities for framing guidelines, regulations and legislation concerning children’s access to social-media platforms, age-based regulation of content, stronger implementation of existing laws, content filtering, protection against circulation of exploitative material and verification of users, the Division Bench of V. Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ., directed the Union of India to consider the writ petition together with the petitioners’ note of suggestions and to pass a reasoned order.
The petitioners approached the High Court seeking regulatory and protective measures concerning children and their use of social-media platforms, including:
-
Issue guidelines, regulations and legislation restricting social-media access for children below 13 years and regulating content for children between 13 and 16 years.
-
Stricter implementation of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act), the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
-
Issue guidelines against circulation of inappropriate exploitative material affecting the psychological health of children.
-
Issue guidelines for imposing overnight curfews on the access to social-media platforms for children from 13 to 16 years of age.
-
Oversee the operations of Respondents 6 to 10, so that proper implementation of the privacy policies curated for children can be ensured.
-
Implements a viable verification model in their interface for proper verification of user, model like Digi Yatra be implemented with Aadhaar ID of the child or the child as well as the parent, keeping in mind the privacy of the user.
-
Issue guidelines for content filteration all over the social-media platforms and banning of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) containing URLs as per the age bracket.
-
Issue guidelines and regulations by taking inspiration from the legislations passed by the other countries.
During the earlier hearing, Counsel for Meta, brought Court’s attention to the Supreme Court’s order dated 4 April 2025 in Zep Foundation v. Union of India, W.P. (C) No. 8128/2025, wherein one of the issues was similar to an issue raised in the present petition.
Counsel for Respondents 1 to 5 suggested that since the reliefs sought were essentially within the domain of policy, therefore, the petitioners be granted liberty to make a representation to the respondents’ authorities and that, if such representation were made, it would be considered and decided in accordance with law.
Considering the nature of the reliefs and the respondents’ stand that the matter fell within the policy domain, the Court deemed it appropriate to dispose of the petition by directing Respondent 1 to consider the writ petition along with the note of suggestions filed by the petitioners on 20 August 2026 and pass a reasoned order on the same.
The Court further left it open to Respondent 1, if considered appropriate, to give a hearing to the petitioners’ representative while considering the representation and the note of suggestions.
Also Read: No Social Media Below 15: France Passes Landmark Law to Protect Minors from Online Harm
[Kirti Dua v. Union of India, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 6685, decided on 20-8-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners: Ms. Pinky Anand, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anshul Gupta, Mr. Rishabh Darira, Ms. Adeti Salooja, Mr. Samrat Pasriccha, Mr. Shashank Chamoli and Mr. Vinayak Tiwari, Advs. along with Petitioner in person
For the Union of India: Ms. Nidhi Raman, CGSC With Mr. Akash Mishra and Mr. Arnav Mittal, Advs.
For the Respondent 6: Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Varun Pathak, Mr. Amee Rana, Ms. Sana Banyal and Ms. Tanvi Raina, Advs.
For the Respondent 8: Mr. Madhav Khosla, Adv.
