"Supreme Court: Children Have Fundamental Right to Internet Access"
Void ab initio
an agreement that has no legal effect from the moment it is made
CSEAM
Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse Material, content depicting sexual abuse of minors
The Constitution protects children through several overlapping rights. Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. Article 19(1)(a) guarantees freedom of speech and expression. The Supreme Court has now held that the right to access and use the internet is a fundamental right under Article 21 read with Article 19(1)(a). This right belongs to children just as it belongs to adults. This builds on the earlier K.S. Puttaswamy judgment. That judgment held that privacy is part of Article 21. Privacy means the right to control personal information about oneself.
Indian contract law adds another layer to this debate. Under Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, only a person who has reached the age of majority and is of sound mind can enter into a valid contract. As a result, a minor's agreement is void ab initio under Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act. This means it has no legal force from the very beginning. Yet children routinely click 'I agree' to a platform's terms of service. The law has never squarely addressed this gap. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act already criminalises the creation and circulation of child sexual abuse material online. Provisions of the Information Technology Act also criminalise this conduct.
The order came in a case about whether social media platforms should impose stricter age limits on children. Some other countries have adopted such bans. The Bench rejected an outright ban. It held that blanket restrictions are an unproven measure of proven disproportionality. No country has actually shown that banning children from the internet makes them safer. Instead of a ban, the court called for layered safeguards. These include parental consent, parental guidance, supervision of children's accounts, and a dedicated 'child mode'. The settings in this mode should match the actual risk.
This approach echoes the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023. …
The Supreme Court of India has recently held in its judgment that the Right to Privacy is intrinsic to Right to Life and Personal Liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Discuss the implications of such a judgement in detail.
The Supreme Court held that the right to access and use the internet is a fundamental right under which combination of constitutional provisions?
The Supreme Court's recent directions on online child safety included which of the following?
1.Rejection of a blanket ban on children's internet access
2.A dedicated 'child mode' with parental supervision for children's social media accounts
3.Forfeiture of revenue earned by intermediaries from paywalled child sexual abuse material
Select the correct answer using the code below:
Consider the following statements regarding the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, 2023:
1.It requires verifiable parental consent before processing a child's personal data.
2.It expressly prohibits a minor from independently creating an account on any digital platform.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
With reference to child protection law in India, consider the following pairs:
1.POCSO Act — Criminalises sexual offences against children
2.Section 67B, IT Act — Penalises publishing child sexual abuse material electronically
3.Section 11, Indian Contract Act — Governs competence to contract
How many of the above pairs are correctly matched?
Under Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, an agreement entered into by a minor is:
Want the full note, Prelims Facts & MCQ answers?
Create a free account — takes less than a minute.
Create free account