One of my clients recently had a case which I am explaining below and if you are stuck in such similar situation, here is what to do.
Note: Due to attorney-client privilege, I cannot disclose complete case details or identify the actual parties involved. However, I am sharing the essential facts and legal approach so that if you find yourself in a similar situation, you can understand the available solutions and legal remedies.
TL;DR: Messaging adult creators on social media using your own real account is generally not a criminal offence under Indian law, provided the content you send is not obscene, sexually explicit by Indian standards under Section 294 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), or violates the Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 67). The anxiety about "addiction loops" and fear of prosecution is usually unfounded, unless you have shared explicit images, engaged in financial fraud, or harassed the content creator. The law does not criminalise the mere act of being a fan.
The client approached the Chamber of Advocate Sudhir Rao after reading an online forum post that incorrectly suggested every interaction with an adult content creator was a cognizable offence. The client, a 21-year-old engineering student from Nashik named Rohan Kulkarni, had been regularly messaging a known Indian adult content creator on a popular social media platform. He had used his real name, profile picture, and college email ID. The messages were polite — compliments, requests for content, and casual conversation. But Rohan had read an article claiming that simply messaging such accounts could attract charges under Section 294 BNS and Section 67 of the IT Act. The fear was genuine. He could not eat or sleep. The office of Advocate Sudhir Rao carefully reviewed the messages, the platform's terms of service, and the relevant legal provisions. It was determined that no offence had been made out. The messages were not obscene, not threatening, and not illegal. Advocate Sudhir Rao and his office advised Rohan to stop engaging with the account to break the addiction loop and seek counselling. A formal response was drafted to any future legal notice, clarifying that no crime had occurred. The matter was closed. Advocate Sudhir Rao's expertise in cyber law — specifically the exact limits of Section 67 IT Act — helped secure the client's peace of mind without a single court hearing.
Key Facts of the Case
- The client was a 21-year-old engineering student from Nashik, Maharashtra.
- He used his real-name social media profile to message a known Indian adult content creator.
- His messages contained compliments and requests for content — nothing obscene, threatening, or harassing.
- He had a compulsive pattern of messaging multiple times daily.
- No explicit images, videos, or links were shared by the client.
- No financial transaction, fraud, or extortion was involved.
- The content creator's platform did not file any complaint with the police.
- Advocate Sudhir Rao's office determined that no cognizable offence was made out under BNS or the IT Act.
The Direct Legal Answer
Can I be arrested for messaging an adult creator on my real account?
No, not unless your messages cross specific legal lines. The Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) only criminalises obscene acts in public places under Section 294 (which replaces old Section 294 IPC). Private messaging alone — without obscenity or harassment — does not fall under this section.
What about Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000?
That section applies only if you are publishing, transmitting, or causing the transmission of obscene material in electronic form. If you are merely receiving content or sending non-obscene messages, you are not covered by Section 67. And here's the thing: the "addiction loop" you describe is a psychological pattern, not a criminal act. The law does not punish compulsive behaviour unless it leads to illegal acts.
Is it a crime to be a fan of an adult creator?
No. Freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a) protects your right to view, like, comment, and message within lawful boundaries. The State cannot criminalise curiosity or admiration. The Supreme Court in the case of Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018) and later in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) clarified that speech must be restricted only for very limited, specific reasons under Article 19(2). A private message does not threaten public order.
Advice in Such Cases
Consult with Lawyer: The very basic and important step to start is talk to Lawyer / advocate. You should not hesitate in paying his consultation fee i.e. might be in range of Rs. 10,000 to 50,000 depends case to case. He is helping you in this situation to come out. He is expert in the domain and can help you explain the procedure which you might have never explored. A good lawyer can get the issues resolved much faster than you think.
Second, stop the behaviour that's causing the anxiety. Delete the messaging threads if you want, but don't destroy evidence before a lawyer reviews it. Third, block the creator's account and step away from the social media platform for at least a month. The compulsive loop often breaks with physical distance from the trigger. Fourth, consider consulting a mental health professional if the compulsion persists — legal anxiety and behavioural addiction often respond to therapy, not litigation. This is a domain where a cyber-crime specialist can distinguish between a technical violation and a mere nuisance, something a general practitioner may not grasp quickly.
Applicable Sections of Law
- Section 294 BNS — Obscene acts or songs in public places. Punishable with up to 3 months imprisonment or fine. Not applicable to private messaging unless the messages are sent publicly or to a channel.
- Section 79 BNS — Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman. Only applies if there is intent to insult. Non-threatening compliments do not attract this.
- Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 — Publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form. Punishable with up to 3 years imprisonment and fine up to Rs. 5 lakh on first conviction. Does not cover receiving content or sending non-obscene messages.
- Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India — Freedom of speech and expression. Protects the right to send and receive lawful messages online.
Punishment and Penalties
Under Section 294 BNS, the maximum punishment is 3 months imprisonment or fine. It is a bailable, non-cognizable offence. Under Section 67 IT Act, the first conviction can result in up to 3 years imprisonment and a fine up to Rs. 5 lakh. It is a cognizable, bailable offence. However, no offence arises unless the messages actually contain obscene material — defined by Indian courts as "tending to deprave and corrupt morals." Simple messages expressing admiration do not meet this threshold.
Jurisdiction — Where to File the Case
If a complaint is filed, the police station with territorial jurisdiction would be where the complainant (the content creator) resides or where the offensive messages were allegedly sent. For cases under the IT Act, the police can register an FIR at any cyber crime police station in the country. If the matter goes to court, the Magistrate of the first class where the complainant resides or where the content was viewed generally has jurisdiction. Jurisdiction matters because the accused may have to travel to that city for bail or trial — a significant burden for a student.
What if Police Refuse to File FIR?
In this type of anxiety-based situation, no FIR is expected at all. But if someone else files a false complaint and the police refuse to register it:
- Approach the Superintendent of Police under Section 173(4) BNSS (formerly Section 154(3) CrPC) for a direction to register FIR.
- File a private complaint before the Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS (formerly Section 200 CrPC).
- File a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 if there is a clear refusal without reason.
Rights of the Accused
If you are a target of a false complaint in such a matter, you have critical rights:
- Right to remain silent — Article 20(3) protects against self-incrimination. You are not required to confess or answer questions that would expose you to a criminal charge.
- Right to legal representation — Under Article 22(1), you can be defended by a lawyer of your choice at any stage.
- Right to be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours — Arrest cannot lead to detention beyond 24 hours without judicial order.
- Right to a copy of the FIR — You are entitled to a copy free of cost.
- Right to know grounds of arrest — The police must inform you of the specific offence at the time of arrest.
Bail Provisions
Under Section 294 BNS, the offence is bailable, meaning bail is a right, not a discretion. Under Section 67 IT Act, the offence is also bailable. In both cases, you can file for regular bail under Section 480 / 483 BNSS. If you believe arrest is likely, you may seek anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS (formerly Section 438 CrPC). The courts typically grant bail in such cases unless there is evidence of substantial harm or repeat offending. Bail strategy: apply before arrest if possible; ensure you have a lawyer at the police station during questioning.
Quashing of FIR / Case
If a false FIR is filed, you can petition the High Court under Section 528 BNSS (formerly Section 482 CrPC) to quash the case. Grounds include no prima facie offence, malicious prosecution, abuse of process of law, or compromise with the complainant. In a case where the messages are not obscene, quashing is strongly viable. The Supreme Court has held in the case of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992) that FIR may be quashed if the allegations do not constitute any offence. That reasoning applies squarely here.
If You Are the Victim
If you feel harassed by a content creator or another account:
- Do not respond to the account. Block, report, and screenshot everything.
- File a complaint on the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (cybercrime.gov.in).
- If the conduct amounts to criminal intimidation or stalking, visit the local police station and seek to file an FIR under Sections 353C (stalking) or 351 (criminal intimidation) of BNS.
- Preserve all evidence — messages, screenshots, profile details, timestamps.
- Consult an advocate before deleting any content you may need as evidence later.
Documents You Must Keep Ready
- Aadhaar card or other photo identity proof.
- Mobile screen recordings / screenshots of all messages exchanged.
- Profile details of the other account (display name, username, link).
- Timestamps and dates of the messages.
- Any emails or notifications from the social media platform related to the account.
- A written chronology of events.
- Bank statements or UPI history (if any financial transaction was involved).
What Evidence Is Required?
In a case where a crime is alleged, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt. For the defence, the following evidence is useful:
- Primary evidence: Original messages from your account. Show that they were not obscene, threatening, or harassing.
- Secondary evidence: Certified copies of screenshots, video recordings, or emails.
- Forensic evidence: Metadata showing timestamps and IP addresses can confirm your location. This can prove you were not near the complainant at the time.
- Witness testimony: A friend who saw the messages can corroborate their nature.
- Platform records: Social media companies store message logs. With a court order, you can obtain them.
How the Police Behave in Such Cases
In matters concerning adult content or cyber crime, police behaviour varies wildly. Some officers understand the nuances of Section 67 IT Act and will dismiss a trivial complaint. Others may file an FIR on a vague complaint, especially if political or moral pressure exists. The attitude often falls into two camps: either they will call it a "minor thing" and refuse to act, or they will over-react and make an arrest to create a record. A lawyer's presence during questioning is critical to ensure your rights are not infringed. Never give statements without legal counsel in such cases.
Timeline of Legal Process
If a case proceeds (which is unlikely here), here is the roadmap:
- FIR registration: Immediately after complaint. Day 1.
- Investigation: Police record statements, collect digital evidence. Takes 1-3 months.
- Charge sheet filing: Within 60-90 days if offence is bailable. The police must file within 90 days for non-bailable ones.
- Cognizance: Magistrate takes cognizance of the charge sheet. 1-2 months after filing.
- Trial: Framing of charges, evidence recording, arguments. 6-18 months.
- Judgment: Typically within 12-24 months from FIR, unless the case stays at the High Court.
- Appeal: If needed, 12-18 months more in the Sessions Court or High Court.
How Long Will the Investigation Take?
For a simple Section 67 IT Act case involving a single user and a single complainant, the investigation normally completes within 30-60 days. The police must file a charge sheet within 60 days for bailable offences, or else the accused is entitled to default bail. In a matter where no offence is made out, the police may simply file a closure report in 2-3 months.
Understanding the Costs
The total cost of a matter like this varies significantly from one case to the next — it depends on the complexity of the dispute, the forum involved, the number of hearings, and the specific facts of your situation. There is no single fixed figure that applies to everyone.
A professional advocate can give you an accurate estimate only after reviewing all your facts and documents in a consultation.
Can the Matter Be Settled Out of Court?
Yes, if the content creator files a complaint and it is a compoundable offence, the parties can settle. Under the BNSS, offences under Section 294 BNS are compoundable with the permission of the court. However, Section 67 IT Act is not compoundable under the general list. But in practice, if both parties reach a settlement and the complainant withdraws the complaint, the court may consider closing the case or quashing the FIR. A settlement is advisable when there is no substantial harm done and both parties wish to move on.
Common Mistakes People Make
- Destroying evidence too early: Deleting messages or blocking the account before a lawyer reviews them can cause loss of useful exculpatory evidence.
- Responding to a legal notice without a lawyer: Panic replies can be used against you in court.
- Posting on social media about the case: Public statements can complicate your legal position.
- Engaging a lawyer without domain-specific experience: A general practitioner may not know the nuanced limits of Section 67 IT Act or the BNS obscenity provisions. A specialist in cyber law will spot the absence of a crime faster and craft a sharper defence strategy.
- Paying money to the creator to make the problem go away: This often invites extortion, not resolution.
- Ignoring the psychological compulsion: The legal fear may persist even after law is clarified. Seek therapy separately from legal advice.
FAQs People Normally Have
Can I be prosecuted if I just liked a post from an adult creator?
No. Liking or sharing non-obscene content is not a crime under Indian law.
Will the police come to my college if I file a complaint against the creator?
Only if a formal FIR is registered. Most colleges cooperate with police, but a legal representative can prevent unnecessary harassment.
Should I tell my parents about this?
It depends on your comfort and the risk. If no crime has occurred, you may choose to handle it yourself. But if a legal notice arrives, your parents should know. A family consultation with the lawyer can reduce anxiety.
Is there a limitation period for filing a complaint under Section 67 IT Act?
Not strictly. But a delay of more than 3 years without explanation can be a ground for quashing the case as stale.
Can the content creator sue me for defamation?
Only if your messages contain false statements that harm the creator's reputation. Compliments and opinion are not defamatory.
This article is general legal information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate about your specific situation.
Advocate Sudhir Rao, Supreme Court of India
Facing a similar matter? Speak to a criminal lawyer in Delhi — Advocate Sudhir Rao appears in bail, trial and appellate matters before the Delhi District Courts, the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India.