Revenge porn, which is more correctly named non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII), is the sharing or publishing of sexually explicit images or videos of a person without the consent of that individual, usually as an expression of vengeance, coercion or blackmail. The situation has worsened with the rise of digital intimacy, smartphones, and the instant sharing of information. The Annual National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reports show an increasing trend in the number of cyber crime cases reported in the country. This is compounded by the fact that online platforms are anonymous and across borders, making takedown and accountability difficult. Combine that with anonymous platforms and cross-border hosting, and victims face an uphill battle in terms of takedown and accountability.

To address such crimes, India primarily relies on the Information Technology Act (“IT Act”), 2000, particularly Sections 66E, 67, and 67A, as well as the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (“BNS”), 2023, which has superseded various clauses of the Indian Penal Code to capture the evolving nature of these crimes. The statutes are old pieces of legal instruments, yet significant to the current campaign against cyber-enabled gender-based violence. This article examines the extent to which the same legal provisions apply, international comparisons, the psychological and social consequences for victims, and the inevitable necessity of reform in India’s digital justice paradigm.

The Scale of the Problem

The increasing danger of non-consensual intimate imagery (NCII) presents itself in the rising cyber crime figures in India as well as at a global level. The number of registered cybercrime cases in India increased drastically, with the NCRB reporting 65,893 cases in 2022 alone. Importantly, the crimes reported under Section 66E (violation of privacy) and Sections 67 and 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, which criminalise transmission of obscene and sexually explicit information, have been on an alarming rise. Additionally, offences categorised as “cyber stalking/bullying of women and children” rose from 1,176 cases in 2021 to 1,471 in 2022. These alarming trends reflect both broader digital misuse and evolving harassment modalities. There is a worldwide trend towards treating image-based sexual abuse with more seriousness.

The same trend is also disturbing internationally. In 2017, a Cyber Civil Rights Initiative (CCRI) study reported that 12.8% of all participants had been victims of NCP in the United States, i.e. having had a sexually explicit image of them shared online without consent. Another survey conducted by the UK government in 2019 shows that the majority of calls, around 73% were made by women to their Revenge Porn Helpline, the majority being victims of intimate image abuse. Such statistics reflect the worldwide epidemic that disproportionately targets women and lesser-represented groups, exacerbated even by the viral quality of social networking and messaging applications.

The discrepancy between the number of real cases and official data, especially in India, can be attributed to underreporting, primarily due to fear, stigma, and reluctance to confide in the police. The victims are usually silent, and the perpetrators take advantage of the rate at which the justice system reacts to cause long-lasting injury to the victims.

International Best Practices

Various jurisdictions have implemented stronger frameworks to address NCII. In the United Kingdom, the Online Safety Act 2023 imposes clear duties on providers to reduce the risks of illegal content through proactive systems. A provider must promptly remove illegal content once it is detected or reported.

In Australia, the eSafety Commissioner can order the immediate removal of abusive content. Moreover, the Commissioner can direct assistance to victims, including guidance on legal options and counselling.

The Take It Down initiative in the United States requires sites to delete intimate material within 48 hours of a report. It relies on advanced technology-based detection to prevent re-uploads.

These models show that clarity in regulation, strong enforcement powers, and victim-focused mechanisms make a measurable difference — lessons India can adapt.

Legal Framework in India

The Indian legal framework to tackle the issue of non-consensual intimate imagery consists of the BNS, the IT Act, and rules issued thereunder. Sections 66E, 67, and 67A in the IT Act provide punishment for violation of privacy and transmission of obscene or sexually explicit content. Through Sections 77 and 78 in the BNS, voyuerism and stalking are covered. Even though there is no explicit understanding of the term, the meaning of revenge porn or sharing and sending non-consensual images is considered an individual crime. This legal ambiguity often leads to inconsistency and interpretive challenges.

In 2018, an Indian court gave the first-ever conviction in a revenge porn case in the case of State of West Bengal v. Animesh Boxi. This trial court judgment set a precedent in terms of the recognition of sharing intimate images without the consent of the other party as a severe offence. The accused was a college boy who posted on a porn site indecent pictures and videos of his ex-girlfriend without her consent. For the victim, this resulted in mental and reputational damage of a high degree. The trial court’s verdict highlighted the importance of victim-oriented solutions and justice for the digital form of sexual abuse.

Moreover, in the case of Subhranshu Rout v. State of Odisha, a Senior Advocate stated the discouraging behaviour of police authorities at the time of the complaint in such cases. She said that slow judicial procedure is another deterrent. “By the time the trial happens, everyone has forgotten what happened!”

Nonetheless, it remains a fact that the victim-centred legal approach is essential to address the issue of NCII.

Psychological, Emotional, and Social Impact

The damage caused by NCII is often as lasting offline as online, and in many cases, the psychological wounds never heal. Victims frequently report a feeling of anxiety, depression, insomnia, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). An Indian survey in 2025 revealed that, while cyber victimisation is linked to stress and anxiety, its influence on depression may be more complex. A victim expressed that “I was screaming and crying and violently scrolling through my phone to work out what I was reading and what I was looking at.” The psychological trauma is sometimes devastating, but so is the fallout on society.

Victims tend to be shunned in society, put on the blame curve, and the blow torch mode, and this can be a real obstruction to their education, careers, and family lives.  All combined, mental anguish, societal stigma and gendered stigmatisation demand a comprehensive solution to blend legal relief with trauma-involved mental health care as well as community-based rehabilitation. Additionally, the academic and social repercussions are substantial. The study, conducted by The Hindu, looked at the extent of technology-facilitated sexual violence among college students and revealed that 60 per cent of the women reported abuse. Such episodes commonly increased feelings of depression, withdrawal and even termination of studies or disconnection with digital life.

Therefore, the psychological consequences of non-consensual intimate imagery are dismal, with the victims, in most cases, developing anxiety, depression, and even social withdrawal.

Combating the Issue: Possible Solutions

We cannot address the increasing threat of non-consensual intimate imagery without a pronged solution. It is legally possible for Indian victims to bring complaints under the IT Act and BNS only through local police stations or via the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal. Nevertheless, slow speeds of investigation and takedown are prevalent. The platforms must comply with the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, to respond quickly to user complaints; however, they are still not held accountable in practice.

Furthermore, the victims of revenge porn are eligible to obtain financial compensation under the Central Victim Compensation Fund (CVCF) under the guidelines of NALSA through its application in annual schemes. Nevertheless, there are still narrow spots to access because of the delays in the procedure, the lack of awareness, and the absence of specialised care for the survivors of cyber crime. To reinforce victim support, we should simplify the process and combine it with expedited takedown and counselling services to facilitate comprehensive recommendations for redress. The concomitant initiatives on digital literacy, mental health care, and institutional sensitivity, as well as the service of pro bono legal counselling services, will help to make the environment safer for survivors.

Such measures give India an indication to tighten intermediary obligations and to force faster responses. Best of all, the introduction of digital consent and privacy education in schools and colleges may eventually lead to cultural changes.

Conclusion

Technology is evolving faster than India’s justice system, and every delay leaves another victim exposed, another life dismantled. Sharing images without consent is not only a privacy violation but also a form of exploitation. It is a calculated assault on dignity, mental health, and safety. India’s IT Act and BNS have given us tools, but they are blunt against a crime this fast-moving and borderless. A combination of bold policing, institutional responsiveness, and digital literacy is the only way in which we can optimistically hope to eradicate the culture of image-based sexual abuse. Unless lawmakers tighten platform obligations, police responses accelerate, and survivor services become as immediate as the harm itself, the next victim will already be in crisis before help arrives. The question is — will we reform now, or will we wait for the next viral scandal to force our hand?