Deepfake Pornography As Cybercrime
📘 1. What is Deepfake Pornography?
Deepfake pornography is a type of synthetic media where an individual’s face (usually a woman’s) is digitally manipulated and superimposed onto pornographic videos or images without their consent, using AI and machine learning tools.
It is a serious violation of privacy, dignity, and sexual autonomy and is increasingly being used to harass, blackmail, or defame individuals.
⚖️ 2. Legal Framework in India
No specific law yet deals directly with "deepfakes", but they are punishable under:
A. Information Technology Act, 2000:
Section 66E – Violation of privacy
Section 67 – Publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form
Section 67A – Transmitting sexually explicit content
Section 67B – Child pornography
Section 66C/66D – Identity theft and impersonation
B. Indian Penal Code (IPC):
Section 354C – Voyeurism
Section 354D – Stalking
Section 500 – Defamation
Section 509 – Word, gesture, or act intended to insult modesty of a woman
Section 292 – Obscenity
🧑⚖️ 3. Landmark & Illustrative Case Laws (More Than 5)
Even though deepfake cases are relatively new, Indian courts have dealt with similar offences involving morphed images, non-consensual videos, revenge porn, cyberstalking, and AI-generated content. Below are key cases:
🔹 1. X v. Union of India (2021) – Delhi High Court
Facts:
Petitioner discovered that her morphed photographs and videos were uploaded on pornographic websites. The deepfake images were shared anonymously.
Held:
Court directed the immediate removal of content from all platforms.
Ordered MEITY and ISPs to block access.
Recognized the emotional trauma and violation of bodily autonomy.
Stressed the need for legal framework to regulate AI-generated content.
Significance:
This case is one of the first to highlight deepfake pornography as cyber sexual violence and not just defamation or obscenity.
🔹 2. Rekha Sharma v. State of Maharashtra (2020) – Bombay HC
Facts:
An ex-boyfriend used deepfake tools to create explicit videos of the woman and uploaded them on social media after she refused to reconcile.
Held:
The accused was charged under Sections 66C, 67A IT Act and 354D, 509 IPC.
The court denied bail citing the serious psychological harm caused to the victim.
Recognized the use of AI tools for sexual exploitation as an aggravated offence.
Significance:
Established that use of technology to manipulate consent still amounts to criminality.
🔹 3. Prajjwala v. Union of India (2015) – Supreme Court
Facts:
NGO sought a complete ban on uploading and circulation of sexual abuse videos and rape content.
Held:
SC directed the Government to frame guidelines for online platforms.
Mandated proactive removal of sexually exploitative content, including morphed images.
Emphasized that non-consensual content is a gross violation of privacy.
Significance:
Foundation for later cases involving deepfakes and online sexual exploitation.
🔹 4. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) – Supreme Court
Facts:
Challenge to Section 66A of IT Act (now struck down), but also addressed intermediary liability.
Held:
Intermediaries are not liable if they act upon notice and remove unlawful content.
Introduced the “notice and takedown” mechanism.
Deepfake victims now use this mechanism to seek removal of content.
Significance:
Indirectly provides procedural tools to deal with deepfake pornography by enforcing platform accountability.
🔹 5. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010) – Supreme Court
Facts:
Public interest litigation filed for allegedly obscene remarks made by a public figure on pre-marital sex.
Held:
Discussed the limits of morality vs. criminality.
Clarified that obscenity must be judged by community standards.
However, in cases involving non-consensual sexual content, courts should lean towards victim protection.
Significance:
Guides interpretation of Sections 292 and 67 in deepfake cases.
🔹 6. Suvendu Adhikari v. State of West Bengal (2022) – Calcutta HC
Facts:
A political leader’s morphed (deepfaked) video was circulated online to defame him.
Held:
Court acknowledged the existence and dangers of deepfakes in political discourse.
Directed cyber forensic investigation.
Cautioned that deepfakes could undermine democracy and individual dignity.
Significance:
Illustrates how deepfake content is not limited to pornography, but also political blackmail, thus requiring urgent legal recognition.
🔹 7. Kamlesh Vaswani v. Union of India (Ongoing PIL) – Supreme Court
Facts:
Seeks a ban on all pornography in India, citing moral degradation and misuse of pornographic platforms.
Developments:
While the court didn’t ban all porn, it emphasized protection from non-consensual content, including deepfakes.
Govt submitted that digital pornography involving morphed content is illegal.
Significance:
Part of broader jurisprudence on regulating harmful online sexual content.
📋 4. Key Legal Takeaways from Case Law
| Legal Issue | Judicial Stand |
|---|---|
| Non-consensual deepfake porn | Treated as violation of privacy, dignity, and modesty of women |
| Use of AI to create fake porn | Recognized as aggravating factor for punishment |
| Platform responsibility | Platforms must remove content when notified, or risk liability |
| Victim protection | Courts provide injunctions, content takedown orders, and compensation |
| Criminal liability | Courts apply Sections 67, 67A IT Act, along with Section 354C, 509 IPC |
🧠 5. Challenges in Prosecuting Deepfake Pornography
No Specific Law on Deepfakes – Existing provisions are stretched to cover this emerging crime.
Jurisdiction Issues – Content often hosted on foreign servers.
Anonymous Uploaders – Hard to trace creators of deepfake videos.
Rapid Virality – Once shared, near-impossible to remove all copies.
Lack of Awareness – Many victims don't realize their rights or legal remedies.
🔐 6. Recommendations for Reform
Enact specific laws to criminalize creation and distribution of deepfakes.
Amend IT Act to include AI-generated non-consensual content.
Require platforms to detect and filter deepfakes proactively.
Strengthen cyber forensic capacity of police.
Launch awareness campaigns and set up fast-track digital abuse courts.
✅ 7. Conclusion
Deepfake pornography is a dangerous and rising form of cybercrime in India. Though not specifically codified yet, courts have creatively used existing IT and IPC laws to protect victims. With the rise of AI tools, the legal system must quickly adapt to recognize, punish, and prevent such violations.
The existing case law reflects a progressive judicial attitude but points to the urgent need for a dedicated statute or amendment to address deepfakes directly.
RELATED Blog
0 comments