The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Centre to examine whether statutory rules could be framed requiring social media and other digital platforms to comply with Indian laws governing minors, including the legal restriction on children below 18 independently entering into contracts.
A bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant was hearing a public interest litigation filed by NGO Just Rights for Children Alliance seeking stronger safeguards for minors using social media. The plea has raised questions over children independently opening accounts that require them to accept terms of service and other contractual conditions.
Court seeks safeguards
Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed during the hearing that opening a social media account involves agreeing to digital terms of service, effectively creating a contractual relationship between the user and the platform. Under Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a person who has not attained the age of majority is not competent to enter into a contract.
The court asked the Centre to examine whether requirements protecting minors could be incorporated into statutory rules governing intermediaries. It indicated that safeguards should not remain merely administrative guidelines and should instead be considered for a statutory framework.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, acknowledged the issue surrounding contracts involving minors and told the court that measures could be considered.
PIL flags legal gap
The petition argues that several social media platforms allow children, generally from the age of 13, to independently create accounts by declaring their date of birth. Such users are then required to accept terms of service, privacy policies and other conditions governing their relationship with the platforms.
The plea contends that this creates a legal inconsistency because Indian law regards persons below 18 as minors who cannot independently enter into contracts. It argues that accepting such terms electronically does not alter a minor’s legal capacity to contract.
The petition has also pointed to what it describes as gaps in the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, saying they do not provide a uniform mechanism governing the contractual capacity of minors using digital platforms.
Parental consent proposed
The PIL does not seek a complete prohibition on children accessing the internet. Instead, it has sought a framework under which minors could use digital services with the consent and supervision of their parents or lawful guardians.
Among the measures proposed are effective age-assurance and age-gating mechanisms and verified parental or guardian consent. The petition has also suggested identity verification or e-KYC of parents or guardians to prevent minors from bypassing age restrictions simply by entering an incorrect date of birth.
The plea maintains that children should continue to have access to lawful educational and age-appropriate digital content under a regulated framework while being prevented from independently entering into contractual relationships with digital platforms.
Online risks flagged
The petition has highlighted risks faced by children online, including grooming, trafficking, sexual exploitation, sextortion, cyberbullying, behavioural profiling, misuse of personal information and exposure to age-inappropriate material.
It has argued that relying primarily on self-declared dates of birth provides insufficient protection and sought stronger technological mechanisms to prevent children from independently creating accounts. The petitioner has also sought automated safeguards to identify and restrict inappropriate access.
Centre examining issue
The Supreme Court had earlier, on September 10, sought responses from the Union ministries concerned after observing that safeguards were needed for minors accessing social media and other digital services.
Monday’s proceedings took the issue further by asking the government to examine whether those protections could be given statutory force under the intermediary-rule framework. The matter could have wider implications for how social media and other digital platforms verify the age of users and obtain parental consent for accounts operated by children in India.