Supreme Court declares internet access a fundamental right for children, rejects blanket bans

Market Mastery

Webinar by Vishal Malkan

Find the weak links

in your portfolio by Vishal Malkan

The Supreme Court has declared access to and use of the internet a fundamental right for every individual, including children, ruling that concerns over online safety cannot justify denying minors access to the digital world altogether.

A bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice K Vinod Chandran held that the right is protected under Articles 21 and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, which safeguard the right to life and personal liberty and the freedom of speech and expression, respectively.

The court made the observations while issuing directions to strengthen the detection and removal of child sexual exploitation and abuse material (CSEAM) from social media platforms and other online services.

“Our children, irrespective of their age, enjoy the same rights, and to deny the same altogether would be as absurd as saying children below a certain age do not have a conscience worth protecting or a freedom of speech worth expressing,” the bench observed.

“The safety of our children and their freedom are not at odds with each other. Our children are entitled to both,” it added.

The bench acknowledged that the internet, in its present form, poses significant risks to children. However, it said restricting access because online platforms had failed to prevent the circulation of harmful material would effectively punish children for the shortcomings of intermediaries.

The court described such an approach as “mistaking the victim for the problem”.

It also cautioned that prohibitions might not prevent children from accessing the internet. Instead, they could push minors towards unregulated platforms and websites, where the risks could be more difficult to monitor.

Another concern was that blanket restrictions could discourage children facing online grooming, threats or abuse from seeking help. Fear of being reprimanded for accessing prohibited platforms could prevent them from approaching parents, guardians or other trusted adults, the bench noted.

“Any blanket restriction on the access of internet by children is nothing more than unproven measures of proven disproportionality,” the court observed.

The bench also questioned the implications of age-verification systems that require platforms to establish and repeatedly verify the age of their users. Such mechanisms could entail the collection and monitoring of sensitive personal information, increasing the risks of data misuse and surveillance.

Explaining why children could not be excluded from the digital space, the Supreme Court said the internet serves as a platform for information, learning, creative expression and the exchange of ideas.

The right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a), the court noted, extends beyond speaking or expressing views to include the right to know and to receive and impart information and ideas.

“For many children, particularly in remote areas, it is often the only source of learning and information,” the bench said.

The court also highlighted the importance of online access for children with special needs, observing that digital spaces can offer opportunities to find companionship and connect with others in similar circumstances.

The ruling builds on earlier judicial recognition of constitutional protections in the digital sphere.

In Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020), the Supreme Court recognised constitutional protection for freedom of speech and expression and the freedom to carry on trade or business through the internet under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g). The judgment did not expressly decide whether internet access, in itself, constituted a fundamental right.

In Pragya Prasun & Ors. v. Union of India (2025), the court recognised the right to digital access under Article 21. The latest ruling goes further in expressly affirming the fundamental right to access and use the internet for individuals of all ages, including children.

While rejecting a blanket denial of access, the bench clarified that its observations should not be interpreted as ruling out age-appropriate measures to protect children online.

The court suggested greater reliance on parental consent, guidance and supervision when children use social media platforms. It also referred to the possibility of introducing a dedicated “child mode” for children's accounts.

Potential safeguards could include private accounts by default, restrictions on messages and contact from unknown adults, and tighter controls over the advertisements and content presented to young users.

The bench indicated that such measures could be designed for pre-teens, with reasonable and proportionate mechanisms to verify parental consent. It left the details of implementation to the Union Government.

At the same time, the court clarified that its observations would not prevent the Centre from restricting children's access to specific categories of content or services inherently harmful to them, including adult-content websites.

Alongside its observations on children's digital rights, the Supreme Court issued directions aimed at strengthening the identification and removal of child sexual exploitation and abuse material across online services.

One of the measures includes establishing a comprehensive national database to facilitate the identification of such material and its removal across social media platforms.