Full Breakdown
Supreme Court directs Centre to consider statutory ban on under-18 social-media accounts
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Judicial Directive
On September 28, 2026, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court—Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana—questioned how Indian children can hold social-media accounts when the underlying contracts are void under Indian contract law. The Court asked the Union government to issue directions under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules so that platforms’ software conforms to the legal requirement that only persons aged 18 years or older may register for membership.
Background & Context
The petition was filed by the non-governmental organization Just Rights for Children Alliance (JRCA), founded by Bhuwan Ribu and represented by senior advocate H. S. Phoolka. JRCA argues that minors lack the capacity to enter contracts and that the absence of enforceable safeguards exposes them to online grooming, sexual exploitation, trafficking, behavioural profiling, data misuse, cyberbullying and age-inappropriate content. The NGO seeks a statutory mechanism—rather than voluntary guidelines—to require parental or guardian consent before a minor can create an account on platforms such as Facebook, Snapchat, Twitter and others that currently allow users as young as 13 years to sign up.
Earlier, on September 10, the Court had invited responses from the Union ministries of Electronics and Information Technology and Law and Justice, signalling the issue’s procedural progression.
Official Statements & Responses
- Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench that the government would examine the matter and consider amending the Intermediary Rules to make it a statutory obligation for platforms to block registrations by persons under 18. He noted that existing guidelines could be reinforced and that parental consent could be required for membership of educational websites.
- Justice Joymalya Bagchi emphasized that platforms must adopt an “18-year minimum threshold” for membership and that any guidance must be codified rather than remain a mere recommendation.
- Justice V Mohana echoed the need for software compliance with Indian law, asking the Centre to fashion platform technology accordingly.
- H. S. Phoolka reiterated that contracts entered into by minors are void ab initio and urged the Court to ensure enforceable obligations for intermediaries, not just voluntary standards.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Our request to you - will Centre pass some directions under Intermediary Rules that they should fashion their software or platform in conformity with Indian laws?” — The SG
- “ Justice Bagchi said, "They must restrict, at least in registering membership, to a minimum threshold of 18 years.” — Justices Joymalya Bagchi
- “What are these social media platforms doing? Are they permitting children as young as 12 years to 15 years to have accounts? Let us say Twitter: can a 15-year-old child have a Twitter account? And what is an ‘account’? It is a contract between the social media platform and a child,” — Justice Joymalya Bagchi
- “Membership of educational websites can be taken through consent of parents,” — Solicitor General Tushar Mehta
What’s Next
The Supreme Court scheduled a further hearing on the matter for four weeks after the September 28 hearing. The Court expects the Centre to return with a response on whether the proposed statutory safeguards will be incorporated into the Intermediary Rules.