India Proposes New Online Obscenity Rules

Context

The Union government has submitted a proposal to the Supreme Court to define “obscene digital content” and bring stricter controls on online content under the IT Rules, 2021.  The proposal comes after the Supreme Court asked the Centre to frame clearer guidelines following a controversy over online content.

What the Proposal Contains?

1. Definition of “obscene digital content”
   1. For the first time, the IT Rules would explicitly define obscenity, drawing from:
      1. Section 67 of the IT Act, 2000
      2. Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995

• Indian Penal Code/Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita

2. Restrictions under Code of Ethics
   1. The proposal adds 17 new restrictions, requiring digital platforms to avoid content that:
      1. Offends good taste or decency
      2. Shows indecent, vulgar or suggestive themes

• Presents criminality as desirable

1. Contains repulsive or offensive content
2. Shows ethnic, linguistic, or regional groups in a snobbish or slandering manner

3. Applying Cable TV standards to digital media
   1. Experts say the government is copying the Cable TV Programme Code and applying it to all digital content, which is far more wide-ranging.
4. Cinematograph Act requirement for OTT
   1. OTT content must comply with the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and be fit for public exhibition—effectively treating OTT content like cinema.
5. Community Standards Test
   1. The proposal allows platforms to use the Aveek Sarkar judgment (SC) test to judge obscenity:
      1. Would a reasonable person, using contemporary community standards, feel the content is meant to arouse lust?
      2. Content with literary, artistic, scientific, or political value should not be restricted.

Why Has the Proposal Been Made?

1. Rising complaints about online content
   1. Incidents like Comedian Samay Raina controversy; Viral offensive content triggered public debates and legal petitions.
2. Supreme Court direction
   1. The Supreme Court explicitly asked the government to frame clear guidelines for online regulation.
3. Legal ambiguity in IT Rules 2021
   1. Courts have stayed parts of the IT Rules (Rules 9(1) and 9(3)) for being too intrusive. The government is now attempting to rework or revive these provisions through new definitions.

How the Issue Has Evolved?

1. 2021 – Government notifies IT Rules requiring platforms to remove content violating decency/obscenity.
2. 2021–2023 – Digital news platforms and OTT platforms challenge the rules in courts.
3. Bombay High Court stay – Rules 9(1) and 9(3) stayed for being unconstitutional.
4. Supreme Court asks for new guidelines after complaints about online content.
5. 2024–25 – Government files a note in Supreme Court with proposed amendments defining obscenity.
6. Digital rights groups react – call it the biggest regulatory expansion over digital content.
7. Public consultation to follow after Court’s response.

Implications

1. Major expansion of government control
   1. Bringing the Cable TV Code to the internet means:
      1. Stricter censorship
      2. Broad discretionary powers

• Oversight over all digital content

2. Possible chilling effect on creativity & free speech
   1. OTT platforms, comedians, vloggers, and digital news may face pre-censorship pressure.
3. Legal uncertainty
   1. The proposal revives rules that are currently stayed in court, raising constitutional questions about:
      1. Free speech (Article 19(1)(a))
      2. Excessive executive power

• Delegated legislation

1. Vagueness of terms like “good taste” and “decency”

4. Compliance burden on platforms
   1. Social media and OTT services will need:
      1. Stricter moderation
      2. Additional legal teams

• Automated filters

1. Possibly pre-certification

5. Increased harmonisation with cinema and TV rules
   1. Digital platforms may lose the flexibility that differentiated them from television/cinema.

Challenges & Way Forward

Conclusion

The proposed amendments signal the largest shift in India’s digital regulation. While the move seeks to address genuine concerns about harmful content, the challenge is to ensure that regulation remains constitutional, precise, and balanced, avoiding overreach. A transparent consultation process, clarity in definitions, and adherence to Supreme Court principles will be essential for harmonising free speech, public morality, and platform accountability.