Legal reference date: 28 October 2026

Identity means more than a name or photograph

Confidentiality is a specific protection in POCSO proceedings. Section 23 addresses media disclosure of a child's name, address, photograph, family, school, neighbourhood and other identifying particulars. Removing the name while publishing everything else may therefore be inadequate. A combination of small local details can identify the child to neighbours, classmates or colleagues even when a wider audience would not recognise the description. [1]

For example, a small school's name, class, a parent's occupation and a precise locality may reveal identity together. A blurred face can still leave a recognisable uniform, house or named document visible. Review the whole publication rather than treating each detail as harmless in isolation. Raising public awareness does not require creating a public profile of the child or inviting readers to discover who is involved.

Duties during investigation and trial

Section 24 addresses police protection of identity, and section 33(7) addresses the Special Court's responsibility during investigation and trial. Section 37 provides for in-camera proceedings. Identifying information can include family, relatives, school and other details leading to recognition. These safeguards protect dignity, safety and the child's continuing life, rather than merely controlling the tone of a news story. [1]

An in-camera hearing does not mean that every legally entitled participant is denied necessary case records. Lawful access for a fair proceeding and public dissemination are different questions. Giving necessary documents to an advocate or investigating officer is not equivalent to posting them in a messaging group. The purpose, recipient and authority for each disclosure should be understood before sharing sensitive records.

Is parental permission enough?

The exceptions in sections 23 and 33 involve the competent Special Court, recorded reasons and the child's interests. Parental approval, an interview request or a wish to obtain public support does not automatically remove the statutory restriction. Decisions about the child's interests should not be reduced to publicity advantages. Where disclosure is genuinely considered necessary, seek advice about the appropriate judicial process rather than assume a private consent form resolves it. [1]

Do not assume that the child's later adulthood automatically makes every earlier case record suitable for publication. Consider the specific proposed disclosure, the individual's wishes, applicable law and existing orders. Reposting an old report can spread identifying information again. Material already available online is not necessarily lawful to republish, and its existence does not itself authorise a fresh identifying post.

Consequences of unlawful disclosure

Section 23(4) provides imprisonment from six months to one year, fine or both for contravention of the relevant provisions. Section 23(3) also addresses the responsibility of publishers or media owners for employee acts and omissions. Reporters, editors and digital publishing teams should therefore have a concrete identity-review process. The application of a penalty depends on the particular conduct and the governing legal requirements. [1]

Families, institutions and advocates should also exercise care in public communications. The truth of some information, or public knowledge of the accused's name, does not make disclosure of the child safe. An FIR photograph, medical report or unredacted order can reveal confidential details unintentionally. An intention to help the case does not eliminate the need to assess the publication before it is shared.

Preparing records for limited sharing

For public use, remove names, addresses, school details, telephone numbers, photographs and contextual clues. Check PDF titles, filenames, bookmarks and hidden text. A black rectangle placed over searchable text may not constitute effective redaction. Where explanation is necessary, use anonymised descriptions and remove links back to the actual child. Retain original records separately with access limited to legitimate case needs.

If an identifying publication appears, note its URL and date and seek appropriate action through the publisher, platform or competent authority. Do not amplify the same post while complaining about it. Confidentiality should be considered before starting a public support campaign. Protecting identity supports both the legal process and the child's ability to continue life with dignity after the proceedings. A removed name alone cannot protect against recognition from surrounding details.

Sources

1. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, amended text — NCPCR / Government of India. Definitions, offences, reporting, safeguards, Special Courts and presumptions; 2019 amendments included.

This is general legal information. Assess the records, applicable law and current judicial decisions for a particular case.