Court’s ‘lesson’ for morphing minor’s pics: Man banned from social media for 3 years

“The applicant-accused has misused social media; therefore, it is appropriate to restrict use of social media at least for three years so that he may learn a lesson not to misuse any online platform,” the high court said on July 6, imposing the condition as part of the bail order.

The case arose from allegations that the accused had prepared a morphed photograph of a minor girl and uploaded it on social media, allegedly to defame her. The high court noted that the victim and her mother had already recorded their statements before the trial court, reducing the possibility of the accused influencing prosecution witnesses if released on bail.

Justice Ashok Kumar Jain imposed restriction on the accused that he would not use any social media platform including Facebook, Instagram and others. (Image enhanced using AI)

Morphed image of minor

According to the prosecution, the FIR was lodged based on a complaint dated February 11 filed by the mother of the minor girl. The complaint alleged that the incident occurred between September 18, 2025, and October 16, 2025.

During the investigation, police filed a chargesheet against the accused under Section 77 of the BNS, Sections 11 and 12 of the POCSO Act and Section 67A of the Information Technology Act.

Defence seeks one opportunity

Appearing for the accused, defence counsel argued that his client had been falsely implicated and that the investigation had already concluded. It was submitted that the accused was no longer required for custodial interrogation and there was no likelihood of him absconding or interfering with the investigation.

The defence further argued that the only allegation against the accused was that he had morphed the girl’s photograph and uploaded it on social media. It was also submitted that the accused had remained in custody since April 2, and was willing to undertake not to use social media if the court considered such a condition necessary.

Describing him as a young man who had shared a friendship with the victim, counsel urged the court to give him “one opportunity” to reform himself and cooperate with the trial.

Strict bail conditions

• The high court directed the accused to furnish a personal bond of Rs 50,000 along with two sureties of the like amount.
• It ordered him not to tamper with evidence, influence witnesses or indulge in any criminal activity.
• The court imposed an uncommon restriction requiring him to submit an affidavit before the trial court undertaking that he would not use any social media platform, including Facebook, Instagram, Threads and Snapchat, for a period of three years.
• The order further said that if the accused is found using any social media platform either in his own name or through a fictitious identity, the trial court would be at liberty to recall the bail order itself.
• Additionally, the accused has been restrained from contacting the victim or any member of her family directly or indirectly until the criminal case is finally decided.
• The court also clarified that any violation of the bail conditions would render him liable for cancellation of bail.

Witnesses already examined

The bail plea was opposed by the complainant’s counsel and the public prosecutor, who pointed out that the victim had already been examined before the trial court.

After hearing both sides and examining the record, Justice Jain observed that the statements of both the victim and her mother had already been recorded. The court noted that this significantly reduced the possibility of the accused influencing the witnesses after his release.

The high court also took into account the fact that the accused had remained in custody for a considerable period and that the trial was likely to take further time before reaching its conclusion. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations, the court held that the overall facts and circumstances justified grant of bail.