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.
Around early March 2025, a young man from Nagpur, whom we'll call Arjun Mehta, reached out in a state of complete panic. He had been using a personality-matching social platform to meet new people when he was approached by an unknown profile — no photographs, no verified identity — claiming to be a woman. The conversation started casually enough. Then the other person steered things in an explicitly suggestive direction, making comments about arousal and exchanging Instagram handles. Arjun, unsure of what he had stumbled into, responded with vague, non-committal messages before being abruptly blocked on both platforms.
What frightened him most was a partially visible side-profile photograph of himself that he believed had been screenshot from one of his social media accounts, possibly during the brief Instagram exchange. The unknown account had also claimed to be based outside India. Arjun had not sent any explicit images. He had not initiated the sexual tone. But he was terrified that a cyber complaint could be filed against him based on distorted screenshots of the conversation.
He had first consulted a general civil lawyer in his locality, who was unfamiliar with the procedural specifics of cyber offences and could not clearly advise him on his exposure or his rights. His family then approached Advocate Sudhir Rao. After a careful review of all available screenshots, chat logs, and the sequence of events, a clear legal position was established: Arjun had not initiated the explicit exchange, had not transmitted any obscene material, and the conduct of the other party strongly suggested a sextortion or entrapment pattern commonly seen in online fraud cases. With this documented legal position in hand and a firm understanding of applicable cyber law provisions, Arjun's anxiety was replaced with a structured, confident response. No complaint was ultimately pursued against him.
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.
Preserve all evidence immediately: Don't delete any chats, screenshots, or notification logs — not even the ones that feel embarrassing. Every message, timestamp, and blocked-account notification can establish the sequence of who initiated what. Evidence once deleted is almost impossible to recover, and courts look unfavourably on gaps.
Do not contact the unknown person again: Any attempt to reach out, even to explain or apologise, can be misconstrued and used against you. Stay off the radar of that account entirely. Let your advocate handle any communication strategy.
Do not post anything about this online: Posting about the incident on Reddit, Twitter, or WhatsApp groups creates public records that can be extracted and used in proceedings. Say nothing publicly until this is resolved.
And here's the thing: matters involving online obscenity, entrapment-style chats, and potential sextortion carry procedural and evidentiary nuances that general practitioners simply won't be familiar with. Advocates who regularly handle cyber law matters understand how digital forensics, jurisdictional overlap between Indian and foreign parties, and the evidentiary weight of screenshot chains are assessed in practice. That experience typically makes a material difference to the outcome.
Applicable Sections of Law
The following provisions are relevant in situations involving online sexually suggestive communication, potential obscenity, and digital harassment or entrapment:
- Section 294 BNS (Obscene Acts and Songs): Covers transmission or publication of obscene material in electronic form.
- Section 296 BNS (Sale of Obscene Material): Applies where obscene content is circulated through digital platforms.
- Section 66E of the Information Technology Act, 2000: Punishes violation of privacy by capturing, publishing, or transmitting the image of a private area of any person without consent.
- Section 67 and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000: Section 67 punishes publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form. Section 67A specifically addresses material containing sexually explicit acts. Both are central to cyber obscenity complaints in India.
Punishment and Penalties
- Section 67 IT Act: First conviction — imprisonment up to three years and fine up to Rs. 5 lakh. Subsequent conviction — imprisonment up to five years and fine up to Rs. 10 lakh.
- Section 67A IT Act: Imprisonment up to five years and fine up to Rs. 10 lakh on first conviction; up to seven years on subsequent conviction.
- Section 66E IT Act: Imprisonment up to three years or fine up to Rs. 2 lakh or both.
- Cognizable and non-bailable: Offences under Sections 67 and 67A IT Act are cognizable and non-bailable, meaning police can arrest without a warrant and bail is not a matter of right at the police station level.
- Compoundable status: These offences are generally non-compoundable, meaning they cannot be privately settled to extinguish prosecution.
Jurisdiction — Where to File the Case
For cyber offences under the IT Act and corresponding BNS provisions, territorial jurisdiction lies with the police station in whose area the offence was committed or where the victim received or accessed the offensive content. In practice, cyber crime cells attached to city police commissionerates, such as the Nagpur Cyber Crime Cell or the Pune Cyber Crime Branch, handle these complaints. The Magistrate having jurisdiction is the Chief Judicial Magistrate or the designated cyber court. Now, before you act: because platforms and servers are often located outside India, jurisdiction questions can get genuinely complicated, and an advocate familiar with the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty framework and Section 13 of the IT Act can anticipate these issues early, before they become problems.
What if Police Refuse to File FIR?
If a legitimate cyber complaint is being ignored, or if a false FIR is filed and you need to challenge police inaction on the wrong side of it, the following steps apply:
- Approach the Superintendent of Police or the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Cyber) in writing under Section 173(4) BNSS, requesting registration of a complaint or seeking a review.
- File a private complaint directly before the Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 175(3) BNSS if the police decline to act.
- Approach the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution by way of writ petition if there is wilful non-registration or clear abuse of process.
- File a written complaint with the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (cybercrime.gov.in) which creates a mandatory record that police cannot simply ignore.
Rights of the Accused
If you're the person against whom a complaint is filed or an arrest is threatened, these rights protect you:
- Right against self-incrimination: Under Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, you cannot be compelled to be a witness against yourself. You are not required to hand over passwords, devices, or accounts without due legal process.
- Right to legal representation: Article 22 guarantees your right to consult and be defended by an advocate of your choice from the moment of arrest.
- Right to be produced before a Magistrate within 24 hours: Under Article 22(2) and Section 57 BNSS, no person can be detained beyond 24 hours of arrest without Magistrate's remand.
- Right to a copy of the FIR: You are entitled to receive a copy of the FIR free of charge under Section 173(2) BNSS.
- Right to know grounds of arrest: The arresting officer must inform you of the grounds in a language you understand, as held in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, 1997.
Bail Provisions
Offences under Sections 67 and 67A of the IT Act are non-bailable. This means:
- Regular bail must be sought before the Magistrate or Sessions Court under Section 480 or Section 483 BNSS, as applicable.
- Anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS from the Sessions Court or High Court is strongly advisable the moment there is a reasonable apprehension of arrest — as was the approach taken in Arjun's case.
- Typical bail conditions include surrendering passports, not contacting the complainant, periodic reporting to the cyber crime cell, and not accessing the implicated platforms.
- In cases with credible evidence of entrapment or where the accused had no prior criminal record, courts have shown willingness to grant anticipatory bail, as observed in Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2020 (Supreme Court).
Quashing of FIR / Case
Where an FIR has been registered on a false or exaggerated complaint, quashing before the High Court is a practical remedy. Under Section 528 BNSS, the High Court has inherent powers to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of the process of court. Grounds that courts consider include: no prima facie offence disclosed on reading the FIR, clear evidence that the accused did not initiate the obscene exchange, or that the complaint is a tool of coercion or extortion. Frankly, this remedy is underused by accused persons who don't get proper legal advice early enough. In cases like Pepsi Foods Ltd. v. Special Judicial Magistrate, 1998, the Supreme Court re-affirmed that quashing is appropriate where the complaint is manifestly an abuse of process. Early legal intervention significantly improves the prospects of a successful quashing petition.
If You Are the Victim
If you've been targeted by an entrapment-style online interaction, sextortion, or someone is threatening to misuse your photographs or screenshots:
- File a complaint immediately at your nearest cyber crime cell or through the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal at cybercrime.gov.in.
- Preserve every screenshot, chat log, and notification, including timestamps and platform names, before accounts get deleted.
- Do not pay any money to the person threatening you. Payment rarely ends the harassment and typically invites further extortion.
- Request the platform's trust and safety team to suspend the offending account and preserve data — most major platforms respond to formal legal requests.
- Engage an advocate who can draft a formal cease-and-desist notice and, if necessary, an urgent application before the Magistrate for interim protection.
Documents You Must Keep Ready
- Aadhaar card and PAN card (identity proof for all filings)
- Full screenshots of the chat conversation across all platforms, in chronological order
- Screenshots showing the other person's profile, username, and any bio information they shared
- Instagram direct message history, including the moment of being blocked
- Screen recordings (if available) of the platform interaction
- Mobile phone with original chat data preserved and not factory-reset
- Any email or message in which threats or demands were made
- Bank transaction records if any payment was made under pressure
What Evidence Is Required?
- Digital chat logs (primary evidence): The actual conversation threads from both platforms, admissible under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, with a proper certification.
- Section 65B certificate: A certificate from the person responsible for the device or platform confirming authenticity of the electronic records — without this, digital evidence can be challenged, as settled in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Goratyal, 2020 (Supreme Court).
- Metadata of screenshots: Date, time, and device data embedded in image files establish when the screenshot was taken.
- Profile information of the unknown account: Username, platform ID, IP logs (obtainable via legal notice to the platform).
- Witness statement: The friend or family member who was contacted immediately after the incident — their account corroborates the timeline.
- Device forensic report: If police seize the phone, an independent forensic report from a certified examiner can verify exactly what was sent and received.
How the Police Behave in Such Cases
Cyber crime cells in most major Indian cities are better equipped than they were a decade ago. But their approach can still be uneven. In sextortion and online entrapment complaints, police often struggle to act quickly when the accused party is outside India, since international data requests take time through MLAT channels. When the complaint is against a local accused, police may move fast, sometimes before examining the full context of the chat. Make no mistake: a poorly framed complaint or a panicked accused who speaks without counsel at the police station can create evidentiary complications that are very difficult to undo later. Early engagement of a cyber law advocate before any police interaction is strongly advisable.
Timeline of Legal Process
- Day 1-7: Complaint filed at cyber crime cell or online portal; preliminary inquiry begins.
- Week 2-4: FIR registered (if cognizable offence found) or case referred for further inquiry; police may seek device seizure.
- Month 1-3: Investigation — platform data requests, forensic analysis, recording of statements.
- Month 3-6: Chargesheet filed before Magistrate (within 60-90 days of arrest, or 90 days in serious cases) under Section 193 BNSS.
- Month 6 onwards: Trial commences; framing of charges, examination of witnesses, cross-examination, arguments, judgment.
- Parallel track: Bail
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.