Author: Ahana Banerjee, St Xaviers University
To the Point
The internet has opened up powerful spaces for expression, connection, and community—but it has also become a breeding ground for harassment, abuse, and psychological harm. Cyberbullying, once considered a teenage problem confined to the West, is now an everyday reality in India across all age groups, especially for women, children, LGBTQ+ individuals, and public figures. From relentless trolling, and body-shaming, to threats, fake profiles, and revenge porn, cyberbullying takes many ugly forms—and yet, victims often find themselves without clear legal remedies or timely protection. While India does have laws under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Indian Penal Code, these were not originally designed to deal with the nuanced and persistent nature of online abuse. This article explores the legal landscape around cyberbullying in India, highlights the challenges victims face in accessing justice, and examines landmark cases that reflect the gaps in enforcement. It also presents practical suggestions and policy recommendations for building a safer, more responsive legal framework in the face of rising digital harm. India’s laws—such as the IT Act, 2000, and sections of the Indian Penal Code—offer scattered protections, but these were not built with the realities of online abuse in mind.
As a result, victims often face slow police responses, ambiguous legal procedures, and a lack of cybercrime expertise, leaving them vulnerable, isolated, and unheard. This article takes a closer look at how India’s legal system currently responds to cyberbullying, the gaps that leave victims struggling for justice, and the pressing need for reforms that reflect our digital age. Through real-world examples, legal analysis, and suggestions for change, it aims to spark a conversation around how we can build a safer internet—one where expression is free, but abuse isn’t free of consequences.
Use of Legal Jargon
Though the term cyberbullying has become common in everyday conversations, Indian law doesn’t explicitly define it. Instead, cyberbullying is addressed indirectly through a patchwork of existing legal provisions. For instance, Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 deals with cheating by personation using computer resources—often invoked in cases involving fake profiles or impersonation.
Similarly, Section 67 of the same Act prohibits the publishing or transmission of obscene material online, which is commonly used in cases of revenge porn or sexually explicit threats. In more serious instances, especially involving women, the Indian Penal Code (IPC) steps in. Section 354D covers cyberstalking, while Section 507 punishes criminal intimidation through anonymous communication, both relevant in cases of repeated online harassment. Additionally, Section 499 (defamation) and Section 503 (criminal intimidation) can be applied to cases where bullying harms a person’s reputation or induces fear. What complicates matters is that many of these laws were not designed with digital platforms in mind. Terms like “annoyance,” “obscenity,” and “intent” are subjective and often left to interpretation, which leads to confusion in enforcement. Furthermore, the absence of a dedicated cyberbullying statute creates ambiguity—offenders often go unpunished, and victims are left uncertain about their rights.
Another critical term is “due diligence” under Section 79 of the IT Act, which places a legal duty on platforms like Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter to remove abusive content once notified.
However, in practice, platforms often delay action or hide behind vague community guidelines. While these laws exist, they lack the sharpness and speed required to deal with the fast-paced, borderless nature of online abuse. In short, the legal jargon surrounding cyberbullying exists—but it’s scattered, outdated, and in need of reform to match the realities of the digital world we live in today.
The proof
In a world where our digital presence is almost inseparable from our identity, cyberbullying has become one of the most pressing and personal online threats in India. It’s not a distant or occasional phenomenon—it’s happening in school classrooms, college groups, WhatsApp communities, Instagram DMs, and public comment sections. What makes cyberbullying so dangerous is that it follows victims into their most private spaces, often without them knowing who’s behind the screen. According to NCRB (National Crime Records Bureau) data, over 50,000 cybercrime cases were reported in India in 2021 alone—a 63% increase from the previous year—and a large portion of these involved some form of online harassment, threats, or abuse.
What’s more alarming is that many incidents go unreported, especially among teenagers, women, and marginalized communities, due to fear, shame, or mistrust in the justice system. The Cyber Peace Foundation has found that nearly 1 in 3 Indian schoolchildren report having faced bullying or shaming online. Similarly, a study by the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) noted that women in public roles—journalists, actors, activists—are disproportionately targeted with threats, deepfakes, and trolling campaigns, often with little to no accountability for the perpetrators. Take the case of Rhea Chakraborty, for example—after the death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput, she was subjected to relentless cyber abuse, including rape threats, hate speech, and misinformation. Despite media attention, the law offered limited protection beyond platform-level moderation. In less high-profile cases, victims often find no real-time legal support, delayed FIRs, and police unfamiliar with cybercrime protocols. Even the 2015 Shreya Singhal case, which struck down the controversial Section 66A of the IT Act for being too vague, left behind a void. While it protected free speech, it also removed one of the few legal tools that addressed offensive or threatening messages online—without replacing it with a clear, balanced alternative. All of this points to a sobering reality: India’s legal system is still treating cyberbullying as a technological glitch rather than a psychological and legal crisis. The data is clear. The stories are real. And the law, so far, hasn’t been enough.
Abstract
In India’s rapidly digitizing society, cyberbullying has emerged as a silent epidemic, affecting people across age groups, genders, and social backgrounds. Whether it comes in the form of anonymous threats, revenge porn, fake profiles, or relentless trolling, the damage it causes is real and often long-lasting—impacting mental health, personal dignity, and freedom of expression. This article explores the legal challenges in combating cyberbullying in India, where victims are often left to navigate a maze of outdated or overlapping laws spread across the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Indian Penal Code. While some sections—like those on cyberstalking, defamation, or obscene content—offer partial protection, the absence of a clear, standalone cyberbullying law has resulted in confusion, weak enforcement, and minimal deterrence. Through real-world cases, data insights, and legal analysis, this piece highlights the urgent need for legislative reform, better enforcement mechanisms, and digital education. It advocates for a future where victims are heard, platforms are accountable, and the law evolves to match the pace of technology—ensuring that freedom online does not come at the cost of safety. This article unpacks the legal complexities of addressing cyberbullying in India, analyzing why enforcement often falls short, and how the current patchwork of laws leaves room for ambiguity and inaction. Drawing on data, landmark judgments, and real-life cases, it shows how victims are forced to fight long battles for justice—if they come forward at all. More than just a legal analysis, this article calls for urgent reform: a dedicated cyberbullying law, stronger cybercrime infrastructure, digital literacy, and accountability from both tech platforms and enforcement agencies. Because in a democracy that values expression, silencing abuse is not censorship—it’s justice.
Case Laws
1. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)
This landmark case dealt with the violation of section 66A of Information Technology Act which criminalizes sending of any offensive messages through online communication. The provision was frequently misused to arrest individuals for social media posts that were critical, satirical, or politically sensitive. In this case, the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A on the grounds that it was vague, overly broad, and infringed upon the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The Court noted that terms like “grossly offensive” and “annoying” were subjective and lacked clear definitions, leaving too much room for arbitrary interpretation. While the judgment was a strong step in protecting digital free speech, it inadvertently created a gap in the law, as the provision had also been used in some cases to address threatening or abusive online behavior. This left a vacuum in the legal tools available to deal directly with cyberbullying.
2. Manik Taneja & Anr. v. State of Karnataka (2015)
In this case, a couple had posted critical comments about the behavior of traffic police on Facebook after an unsatisfactory experience. The police responded by filing an FIR under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including charges related to criminal intimidation and cybercrime. The matter reached the Supreme Court, which held that the FIR was unjustified and that expressing dissatisfaction or criticism—even if strongly worded—could not be criminalized unless it clearly crossed the line into incitement or harm. The Court emphasized that free speech must be protected, and misuse of criminal provisions to silence criticism would have a chilling effect on public discourse. This case is relevant to the legal discourse around cyberbullying as it underscores the importance of distinguishing between legitimate online dissent and actual harassment, a line that is often blurred both by law enforcement and social media users.
3. Soman v. State of Kerala (2021)
This case involved the online harassment of a woman through the use of vulgar, defamatory, and sexually explicit content shared on social media. The Kerala High Court upheld the lower court’s conviction of the accused under Section 509 of the Indian Penal Code, , which penalizes the violation of privacy through when captured for leaking of private images without consent also violates section 66 E of Information Technology Act. The judgment reflected the court’s recognition of the psychological and reputational harm that online abuse can inflict, especially when gender-based. The ruling affirmed that existing laws could be effectively applied to digital harassment cases, though it also highlighted the need for more specific, cyberbullying-focused legal provisions that are sensitive to the evolving nature of online abuse.
Conclusion
Cyberbullying may happen behind screens, but its consequences are deeply personal and painfully real. In India, where internet usage is soaring across all age groups and social classes, the threat of online harassment has outpaced the legal system meant to prevent it. Victims, whether they are students, women, or public figures, often find themselves navigating outdated laws, unclear procedures, and a lack of timely support from authorities. While existing provisions in the Information Technology Act and the Indian Penal Code offer partial remedies, they are fragmented, reactive, and not tailored to the unique challenges posed by digital abuse. The courts have stepped in where they can, but in the absence of a dedicated legal framework for cyberbullying, justice often arrives too late—or not at all. The way forward must begin with comprehensive legislation that clearly defines cyberbullying, ensures faster complaint redressal, and assigns clear responsibilities to both law enforcement and digital platforms. Alongside legal reform, we need stronger digital literacy programs, especially in schools and colleges, and a cultural shift that sees online abuse not as “just part of being online” but as a serious violation of dignity and safety. Cyberbullying doesn’t just threaten individuals—it undermines trust in the internet itself. It is time we recognized it not as a side effect of the digital age, but as a core human rights issue in need of urgent legal attention. Though laws under the Information Technology Act and the Indian Penal Code provide some relief, they were never designed to handle the unique dynamics of cyberbullying—where anonymity, speed, and public visibility make the damage deeper and harder to trace. Courts have made important interventions, but in the absence of a clear, standalone cyberbullying law, enforcement remains inconsistent and often ineffective. We need dedicated legislation that clearly defines cyberbullying, streamlines reporting mechanisms, and ensures swift action. But legal reform alone won’t be enough. We also need to invest in digital education, strengthen cyber cells, and foster a culture that holds both users and platforms accountable. Because ultimately, the right to be online should never come with the fear of being attacked.
FAQS
1. What exactly qualifies as cyberbullying in India?
Cyberbullying refers to any form of harassment, abuse, humiliation, or threatening behavior that occurs via digital platforms—such as social media, messaging apps, gaming forums, or email. This can include sending abusive messages, spreading false rumors, posting embarrassing content, impersonating someone online, or engaging in repeated stalking or intimidation. While the term is widely used, Indian law still lacks a formal, dedicated definition for cyberbullying. What makes cyberbullying unique is its borderless, anonymous nature—the abuser can be across the world, yet the damage to the victim can feel close and deeply personal. In many cases, the abuser hides behind a fake profile, making it difficult to trace and report them. And unlike traditional bullying, which ends when the person walks away, cyberbullying follows the victim 24/7, making it hard to escape. It often goes unnoticed or unreported because victims fear not being taken seriously or simply don’t know where to turn. This is why there is an increasing push in India for a clear legal definition of cyberbullying and a more effective support system for victims.
2. Is cyberbullying punishable under Indian law?
Yes, cyberbullying is punishable under various sections of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and also the Indian Penal Code , on what type of crime is committed. For example, Section 66E of the IT Act addresses the violation of privacy, Section 354D IPC deals with cyberstalking, and Section 507 IPC applies to anonymous threats. However, because there’s no single, unified law for cyberbullying, legal action often depends on how well the complaint fits existing categories. Under the IPC, Section 354D addresses cyberstalking, especially when a woman is persistently contacted or followed online, while Section 507 punishes criminal intimidation via anonymous communication. Other applicable sections include Section 499 (defamation), Section 503 (threats), and Section 509 (insulting the modesty of a woman). However, since these laws were not originally crafted with digital abuse in mind, they often leave gaps when it comes to the full range of modern-day online harassment—especially when the bullying is emotional, anonymous, or subtle. This highlights the growing need for a comprehensive cyberbullying-specific legal framework that is responsive to today’s digital realities.
3. How can cyberbullying be reported it in India?
Victims can report cyberbullying in several ways. The easiest and quickest method is to visit the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal at www.cybercrime.gov.in, where complaints—especially those involving women and children—can be filed anonymously. Victims can also file an FIR at their local police station or approach a Cyber Crime Cell in their city. In addition, abusive content should be reported directly to the platform (e.g., Instagram, Twitter, YouTube) using their built-in complaint mechanisms. In parallel, it’s crucial to report the abusive content directly to the social media platform where it occurred. Platforms like Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have in-app tools to block, report, and request removal of harmful content. Taking screenshots and keeping evidence—such as chat history or profile links—is important, as this helps the police build a stronger case. Although the system isn’t perfect, awareness of your rights and persistence in reporting can help ensure that cyberbullying doesn’t go unchecked. There’s still a long way to go, but more victims coming forward is the first step toward change.
4. Can minors be held accountable for cyberbullying?
Yes. If a minor engages in cyberbullying, they can be held responsible under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, especially in cases involving repeated or serious offences. However, the focus is generally on reform and rehabilitation rather than harsh punishment. At the same time, schools are encouraged to include cyber safety education and create systems to address such behavior early. Additionally, schools and institutions are increasingly being urged to have cyber safety policies, including clear consequences for bullying and online misconduct. Education, awareness, and digital sensitivity workshops can go a long way in preventing such behavior in the first place. After all, many young people engage in online harassment without fully understanding the emotional and legal consequences, making early intervention and guidance essential.
5. Why is it difficult to take legal action in cyberbullying cases?
There are several challenges: the laws are fragmented, law enforcement may lack technical training, and victims often hesitate to come forward due to fear or stigma. Additionally, the anonymity of offenders on the internet makes tracking them difficult, and social media platforms may not always cooperate promptly with investigations. These gaps contribute to delays and low conviction rates in cyberbullying cases. Moreover, anonymity and encryption make it difficult to trace perpetrators, especially when they’re using fake accounts or offshore platforms. Social media companies may also delay in sharing data with authorities or removing harmful content, citing privacy or policy restrictions. This creates further obstacles in collecting evidence and ensuring swift action.
For many victims—especially teenagers, women, and marginalized groups—fear of stigma, retaliation, or not being believed adds another layer of hesitation. These barriers collectively contribute to underreporting and low conviction rates, reinforcing the need for a more supportive, tech-savvy, and victim-centric legal infrastructure.
