A school in Madhya Pradesh’s Indore has moved the Supreme Court seeking restrictions on children’s use of social media platforms, arguing that protecting minors from online harms is a constitutional responsibility of the state and cannot be left solely to parental supervision or voluntary safeguards adopted by technology companies.
Yet the social-media environment children inhabit today is, in our submission, nowhere near the safe environment they deserve,” Jain said. Emerald Heights International School and its director Siddharth Singh filed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a comprehensive and enforceable regulatory framework to protect children from risks associated with social media, including cyberbullying, sexual exploitation, exposure to harmful content, compulsive use and mental health problems. The Supreme Court is yet to assign a date for hearing the petition. The respondents in the plea include the Union government and the ministries of electronics and information technology, women and child development, and law and justice, besides the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights. The plea comes weeks after the Supreme Court agreed to examine a related issue concerning the absence of guidelines to regulate the opening and maintenance of social-media accounts by minors. “The Constitution does not envisage a childhood defined by exploitation, distress or abandonment. It calls for children to develop in a healthy manner, in conditions of freedom and dignity. The plea asks the court to declare that the failure to provide effective protection against online harms is arbitrary and unconstitutional, and to direct the Union government to frame, notify and implement a dedicated regulatory framework for children’s safety on social-media platforms. The petition invokes the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, particularly its provisions concerning children’s best interests and protection from physical and mental violence, sexual abuse, exploitation and material harmful to their well-being.
Invoking Articles 14, 15(3), 21 and 21A of the Constitution, the petition contends that the state’s continuing failure to provide effective protection against foreseeable social-media harms violates children’s fundamental rights. It relies on the directive principles of state policy under Articles 39(e) and 39(f), which call for protection of children against abuse and exploitation and for opportunities to develop in conditions of freedom and dignity. On September 10, a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant sought the Centre’s response to a petition filed by a non-profit child rights body, observing that safeguards were needed to protect children online.
