The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has sought detailed action-taken reports from the Centre and Delhi Police over allegations that paid Instagram advertisements directed users to child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
An NHRC bench headed by member Priyank Kanoongo gave the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) and Delhi Police two weeks to submit point-wise responses.
The proceedings followed BBC World Service reports alleging that Instagram carried paid advertisements using search terms such as “rape video” and “child video”. Users who clicked on the advertisements were allegedly redirected to Telegram channels offering CSAM for sale.
The reports further alleged that the advertisements passed Meta’s content review process and remained accessible after being flagged through the platform’s grievance mechanism. The issue was reportedly addressed only after the BBC brought it to Meta’s attention.
The NHRC said that if established, the allegations could involve not only the availability of illegal content but also the sexual exploitation of children, recording and circulation of abuse material, its promotion and monetisation, and possible organised criminal activity.
The Commission directed the authorities to examine the allegations under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, the Information Technology Act, 2000, and applicable intermediary rules. It also stressed the preservation and forensic examination of electronic evidence, identification of those involved, tracing of financial transactions, and measures for the rescue, protection and rehabilitation of child victims.
MeitY was specifically asked whether Section 19 of the POCSO Act had been complied with, including whether the alleged offences were reported to the Special Juvenile Police Unit or local police. If no report was made, the Commission sought details of the responsible authority and action taken over any failure to report.
The NHRC also referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Just Rights for Children Alliance & Anr. v. S. Harish & Ors., which emphasised prompt reporting, preservation of electronic evidence, coordinated investigation and steps to identify and protect child victims.
The Commission noted that Section 79 of the IT Act, which provides conditional safe-harbour protection to intermediaries, could not by itself remove obligations under the POCSO Act.
The proceedings also examined Meta’s possible role in creating, curating and distributing content. Material submitted to the Commission included screenshots that allegedly showed Meta systems suggesting content ideas, formats, captions, posting schedules, audience engagement and monetisation. The NHRC questioned whether a platform that actively generates, modifies, curates, recommends, publishes, amplifies or monetises content could always be treated as a passive intermediary.
The Commission said the platform’s actual functions, rather than its label, should determine its legal status, with its degree of editorial involvement and control potentially relevant. It also highlighted risks associated with recommendation systems, targeted amplification, content curation and monetisation involving children and CSAM.
The MIB was asked to examine whether Meta could fall within the regulatory framework applicable to publishers or publishers of online curated content under the Information Technology Rules, 2021, and to clarify its regulatory status and obligations, if applicable.
The NHRC also sought additional information from Delhi Police, which had earlier submitted a report. The police were asked to detail action taken, including information sought from or received from Telegram and any follow-up action.
The Commission directed MeitY, MIB, Delhi Police and other concerned authorities to submit specific, point-wise reports within two weeks, supported by contemporaneous records rather than general responses.
The inquiry therefore extends beyond identifying individuals who allegedly uploaded or circulated illegal material and examines whether platform systems may have contributed to its selection, recommendation, distribution, amplification or monetisation.
