This is a guest post on laws regarding online grooming written by Advocate Heena Bashir. She is a lawyer and an Assistant Professor of Law in Kashmir.
Children live in the online world:
A recent news report concerning a case of online grooming in Nagpur, which allegedly culminated in the kidnapping and sexual assault of a teenager, caught my attention and prompted me to reflect on a larger and deeply troubling question: Are we adequately protecting children from the dangers of the digital world?
For today’s generation, the internet is no longer merely a source of entertainment or information. It has become an integral part of everyday life. Children study online, socialise online, play games online and increasingly turn to digital platforms even when they are looking for answers to questions they may once have asked a parent, teacher or another trusted adult.
There was a time when a child confronted with confusion, fear or curiosity would instinctively approach an elder in the family or a teacher at school. Today, that first point of reference is often a screen.
And therein lies the problem.
The digital world offers children an unprecedented amount of information, but information without guidance can be overwhelming. Young and impressionable minds may not always possess the maturity or analytical ability to understand what they encounter online, distinguish fact from fiction, or recognise when seemingly harmless interaction is becoming dangerous.
Nothing can replace the human touch that forms an essential part of nurturing a child.
Yet, in an increasingly hectic and technology-driven world, parents may sometimes rely heavily on screens, artificial intelligence-powered toys, gaming platforms and other digital tools to occupy, educate or entertain their children. While these technologies are not inherently harmful, their risks cannot be ignored. A child may be sitting within the safety of their home, yet simultaneously be exposed to strangers and potential predators through a social networking platform, an online game or even an apparently innocent chat feature.
The danger is particularly concerning because online predators do not always appear dangerous.
What exactly is online grooming?
Online grooming has been extensively discussed in our previous article on online grooming.
The most dangerous aspect of grooming is that the child may not immediately recognise that they are being groomed. What appears to be friendship may actually be manipulation. What appears to be a reward may be an inducement. What appears to be a trusted online relationship may be a carefully constructed trap.
This makes online grooming particularly difficult to detect and prevent.
The paradox of growing up in a digital world
Artificial intelligence and digital technology have become realities that cannot simply be removed from a child’s life. Keeping children completely away from technology is neither practical nor necessarily desirable. Digital literacy is increasingly essential to education, communication and participation in modern society.
The answer, therefore, cannot simply be prohibition.
Nor can it be constant surveillance.
What children need is digital guidance.
Parents must educate themselves about the platforms their children use and the risks associated with them. More importantly, they must create an environment in which children feel comfortable discussing uncomfortable experiences without fear of punishment, embarrassment or judgment.
A child who knows that they can approach a parent after receiving an inappropriate message is far better protected than a child who fears that admitting such an interaction will result in their phone being taken away.
The conversation must begin early.
Children need to understand concepts such as personal boundaries, consent, appropriate and inappropriate touch, privacy, secrecy and safe communication from an early age, in language that is appropriate to their age and level of understanding.
The concern becomes even greater with the growing use of AI-powered chatbots and interactive toys. Children as young as four or five may instinctively turn to chatbots when they have questions. While technology can certainly be educational, parents must remain conscious of the fact that children may not have the ability to critically evaluate the information they receive.
The larger question, therefore, is not simply what technology is telling our children, but how children are learning to process what technology tells them.
Is India’s legal framework on grooming sufficient?
India has several laws aimed at protecting children from sexual abuse and exploitation. One of the principal legislations in this field is the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), which provides a comprehensive legal framework for addressing sexual offences against children.
The Information Technology Act, 2000, as amended, also contains provisions dealing with sexually explicit material involving children. Section 67B specifically addresses, among other conduct, the creation, collection, seeking, browsing, downloading, advertising, promoting, exchanging or distributing material depicting children in sexually explicit acts or conduct, as well as certain forms of online enticement and interaction involving children.
However, an important concern remains: Indian law does not comprehensively recognise “online grooming” as a standalone offence in the same manner as some other jurisdictions.
This creates an important gap in preventive child protection.
The law often comes into play once conduct has crossed a certain threshold—such as sexual abuse, exploitation, creation or transmission of prohibited material, kidnapping or other criminal conduct. But grooming itself can be the process through which a predator establishes the trust and control that eventually enables such offences.
This raises a fundamental question:
Should the law intervene only after the harm has occurred, or should it also be capable of intervening when a pattern of grooming is detected?
There is therefore a strong case for examining whether India’s legal framework should specifically define and criminalise online grooming, while ensuring that such a provision is carefully drafted so as not to criminalise legitimate communication or create ambiguity in its application.
A clear statutory definition could help law-enforcement agencies identify grooming behaviour at an earlier stage and provide children with stronger preventive protection.
Prevention rather than cure
When it comes to child sexual exploitation, prevention is undeniably better than cure.
The legal framework should therefore not be limited to prosecuting offenders after a child has already suffered harm. It should also facilitate early identification, intervention and prevention.
Technology companies and the government have an important role to play in this process.
Large social-media platforms already employ mechanisms to restrict or remove certain categories of offenders and harmful content. Similar preventive mechanisms, subject to appropriate safeguards, could be strengthened across social networking, gaming and communication platforms.
For instance, consideration could be given to mechanisms through which information concerning individuals convicted of serious sexual offences against children may, within the boundaries of privacy, due process and applicable law, be used to prevent their access to spaces specifically designed for interaction with children.
Such measures would, however, need to be accompanied by strong safeguards. A system involving offender information cannot operate merely on suspicion or accusation. It must be based on lawful conviction, procedural fairness, data protection and clear accountability.
The objective should not be mass surveillance.
The objective should be child safety by design.
India, the United Kingdom and Australia: A comparative perspective on grooming laws
The need for a more preventive approach becomes clearer when India’s framework is compared with jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom and Australia.
In the United Kingdom, Section 15 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 criminalises meeting a child following certain prior sexual communication or grooming-related conduct. The legislation has subsequently been strengthened, including through provisions addressing sexual communication with a child under 16 for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification.
The significance of the British approach lies in the fact that the law is capable of intervening before the ultimate sexual offence takes place.
Australia has adopted an even more explicit approach towards online grooming. Section 474.27 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 addresses the use of a carriage service to groom a person under the age of 16 for sexual activity. The provision specifically recognises the role of electronic communication in facilitating the grooming of children for sexual exploitation.
These approaches offer an important lesson for India.
Child protection cannot begin only after sexual abuse has occurred. It must begin at the stage where a predator attempts to establish contact, build trust, manipulate a child and move that child towards sexual exploitation.
In a world where the first interaction between a predator and a child may occur through a gaming platform, social-media account, messaging application or AI-enabled service, the law must be capable of recognising the digital pathway to abuse.
Technology cannot replace parenting
At the same time, legislation alone cannot solve the problem.
The responsibility for protecting children cannot rest entirely with the State, law-enforcement agencies or technology companies. It begins at home.
Parents need to know what platforms their children are using. They need to understand the risks associated with gaming and social-media platforms. Most importantly, they need to build relationships in which children feel safe enough to disclose uncomfortable interactions.
The answer is not to tell children that the internet is inherently dangerous.
Instead, we must teach them how to navigate it safely.
A child should know that they do not have to respond to every message, that they should never share private information or images with strangers, that an online friend is still a stranger unless appropriately known in the real world, and that no adult has the right to demand secrecy from them.
They should also know that asking for help will never be their fault.
Protecting children in a world that cannot go offline
The growing prevalence of online grooming is a reminder that child protection is no longer confined to the physical world. Technology has become part of the very fabric of childhood, and our legal and social institutions must evolve accordingly.
The challenge before us is not to take technology away from children, but to ensure that technology does not take childhood away from them.
India needs a legal framework that is capable of identifying, preventing and prosecuting online exploitation, while also ensuring that children have accessible avenues for reporting abuse and seeking help. Technology companies must build safer platforms, governments must strengthen enforcement and regulation, schools must promote digital and sexual-safety education, and parents must remain engaged in their children’s digital lives.
Ultimately, the law can provide the framework, technology can provide the safeguards, and institutions can provide the mechanisms—but meaningful protection begins with awareness and trust.
Protecting children in the digital age is not the responsibility of parents alone, nor is it the responsibility of the State alone.
It is a collective responsibility of the family, society, technology platforms and the State.
Because when a child enters the digital world, they should not have to choose between curiosity and safety.
