Deepfakes, doxxing and digital abuse

Technology is a double-edged sword in the context of violence against women and girls (VAWG).

The National Cybercrime Reporting Portal (NCRP) reported a 118.4 percent rise in online crimes between 2020 and 2024 against women under four major categories: online child sexual abuse and exploitation, gang rape and sexual abuse online content, sexually explicit acts, and sexually obscene material.

The National Crime Records Bureau says 14,409 cases were registered in 2022, only a fraction of the true scale of such crimes in India.

At the same time, technology-driven tools like NCRP have improved the collection of data and reporting of crimes, while the Sahyog Portal, with anonymous reporting, enables law enforcement to receive information from intermediaries.

Given the rapid transformation of technology facilitating new forms of VAWG—from virtual rape and AI-enabled deep fakes to dark web transactions—the key question emerges: Are India's existing laws and institutions responsive and robust enough to address these evolving threats effectively?

In the Indian context, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2024, the IT Act 2008, and the POCSO Act 2012 have provisions for offences like online sexual harassment, stalking, voyeurism, transmitting sexually explicit material, etc.

The IT Rules, 2021, mandate the intermediaries to take down non-consensual images within 24 hours of a complaint being raised. India has central and state mechanisms to address online VAWG, such as I4C, the 1930 helpline, cyberforensic labs, capacity-building MOOC platforms, and cyber cells.

States employ different models, such as Kerala’s CyberDome and Telangana’s Women Safety Wing with Cyber Module. However, effective use and innovation vary widely across states.

Turning to practices in other countries, in the US, 48 states have Revenge Porn laws providing civil and criminal remedies—enabling victims to seek damages and prosecution.

Cyberstalking is explicitly recognized under 18 U.S.C. § 2261A, which grants the FBI cross-state jurisdiction. Some states allow protective orders specifically for cyber harassment.

While the Communications Decency Act (1996) grants digital intermediaries safe harbour, the FOSTA-SESTA legislation (2018) made exceptions for platforms knowingly hosting sex-trafficking content, permitting victims to sue website owners.

Institutionally, the US mirrors India with mechanisms such as the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Centre (IC3), Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Forces, and state CyberCrime Units.

Federal grants support these through VAWA (Violence Against Women Act) and OVM (Office on Violence Against Women).

Civil society partners with the government to further strengthen online victim support and helpline infrastructure. Notably, the US leverages public-private partnerships (PPPs) to strengthen its justice delivery system.

Advanced tech support from start-up companies and universities, especially those developing deepfake detection tools, has been instrumental.

For instance, the National Institute of Justice funds such research. Broader efforts, like youth programs under the Department of Justice, include cyberbullying prevention, educational grants, and girl empowerment.

The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) funds pilot projects that support cybercrime victims, including developing resources for advocates handling image-based abuse.

However, as cybercrimes against women evolve, India faces critical gaps. Existing laws have struggled to ensure the conviction of perpetrators due to generic provisions and a lack of facilities like cyber forensic laboratories.

For example, activities like revenge porn, deep fakes, and online doxxing lack standalone legal provisions.

Cross-border crimes are further complicated by limited expertise and slow processes for legal assistance, allowing perpetrators time to evade accountability.

Section 79 of the IT Act provides a safe harbour for intermediaries, discouraging proactive content monitoring. Furthermore, there are no clear guidelines for AI-generated content, robust victim compensation, or online restraining orders for cyber harassment.

Weak enforcement of the Data Protection Law exacerbates these issues. Against this backdrop, while India's approach remains largely generic, the US adopts specific legislation and targeted institutions.

For India, stronger partnerships with civil society, wider capacity building across government, and dedicated institutions to address tech-enabled VAWG are essential.

Ensuring victim confidentiality—supported by robust data protection laws and institutional frameworks—should be prioritized over anonymity alone. Building on these recommendations, a multi-sectoral approach involving start-ups, universities, and tech giants is vital to address state-level capacity gaps.

Given its vast internet population, India must prioritize public awareness about online abuse safety, allocate dedicated budgets, and seek voluntary community support.

Finally, as technology continues to outpace regulation, India must update laws like the Domestic Violence Act and POCSO Act, and enforce the pending Digital India Bill to clarify punishments and civil remedies for emerging crimes.

Addressing the roots of misogyny and lack of sex education requires urgent, collective attention from all stakeholders, including the Government.

Policy initiatives, such as integrating Childline into 112, should also be rigorously evaluated for effectiveness.

Anu Maria Francis | Senior Associate, Research and Project Management at Centre for Public Policy Research (CPPR)

(Views are personal)

The story is written by Anu Maria Francis for The New Indian Express