Delhi Police registers FIR over alleged circulation of child sexual abuse material on Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp

A First Information Report, or FIR, is a formal record made by police after receiving information about a suspected criminal offence. It identifies the allegations and gives investigators a legal starting point. Registering an FIR does not prove that anyone is guilty. It begins the process of examining evidence and facts.

In this case, the Delhi Police Special Cell registered an FIR on October 8. The complaint alleged that suspected Child Sexual Abuse Material was circulated through Meta platforms. The FIR invokes Sections 67 and 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Around 10 links were included in the complaint.

Investigators must now examine the flagged links, verify what they contain, and determine whether the alleged conduct occurred. They may also identify relevant accounts or other evidence. The article does not state the investigation's outcome. An FIR therefore marks an official investigative step, not a final judgment.

Child sexual abuse material, or CSAM, refers to images, videos, or other material depicting or facilitating the sexual abuse or exploitation of children. The term focuses on the harm involved, rather than treating the material as ordinary pornography. Creating it directly abuses a child, while possessing or sharing it helps keep the exploitation circulating.

The article reports allegations that suspected CSAM was circulated through platforms operated by Meta. Police are examining around 10 links flagged in the complaint. The report does not describe the material itself, and its suspected nature still needs to be verified through investigation.

Indian law treats online child sexual exploitation material as a serious offence, including under the Information Technology Act. The exact legal consequences depend on proven conduct and applicable provisions. The article does not state any finding of guilt. At this stage, the allegations are under investigation, while the alleged material must not be accessed or redistributed.

The complaint flagged around 10 links connected to the alleged circulation of suspected Child Sexual Abuse Material. This number describes the links identified for police attention. It does not establish that every link contained illegal material or that every allegation is true.

The Delhi Police Special Cell must examine the flagged links and verify what they contain. Investigators will also determine the nature of the content and assess whether it was circulated through Meta platforms. These checks are central to distinguishing an allegation from evidence.

The article says the police initiated an investigation after receiving the complaint. It does not report what the links contained, who controlled them, or whether any material was confirmed as illegal. The Special Cell is still investigating. Any conclusions about accounts, users, or possible offences must therefore wait for verification and further findings.

The FIR was registered under Sections 67 and 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000. In broad terms, Section 67 addresses publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form. Section 67B specifically concerns material depicting children in sexually explicit or sexually exploitative contexts and related online acts involving such material.

These provisions matter because the allegation concerns suspected material circulated through social-media platforms. The complaint identified around 10 links, and police are checking whether their content falls within the alleged offences. The FIR records the legal provisions being considered; it does not establish that those offences were committed.

The article says the Special Cell is investigating the links and verifying the allegations. It does not provide details of possible charges beyond the sections cited, nor does it report penalties or arrests. Any eventual legal action would depend on evidence and the investigation’s findings. The provisions provide the legal framework for examining the alleged online conduct.

The National Human Rights Commission, or NHRC, acted as the body that directed Delhi Police to register an FIR. NHRC member Priyank Kanoongo confirmed the development publicly. The commission’s role in this case is to raise the rights concern and seek official action.

Delhi Police, specifically its Special Cell, is the law-enforcement agency handling the matter. It registered the FIR on October 8 under Sections 67 and 67B and is examining around 10 links. Meta is the company operating the social-media platforms through which the complaint alleged the suspected material was circulated.

The article does not say that Meta was accused of creating the material or that the company itself has been charged. It identifies Meta platforms as the alleged route of circulation. Police must verify the links and allegations. The NHRC has confirmed the police response, while the Special Cell continues the investigation.

If the investigation confirms that illegal child sexual abuse material was circulated through the flagged links or accounts, police could use the evidence to pursue action under the legal provisions cited in the FIR. This might include identifying responsible users or accounts and presenting evidence for prosecution. The exact outcome would depend on verified facts and legal decisions.

The complaint alleges circulation through Meta platforms and flags around 10 links. Investigators are checking the links, determining the content’s nature, and verifying whether the alleged circulation occurred. These steps are necessary before authorities can decide what conduct is proved and who may be responsible.

The article does not report arrests, charges beyond the FIR sections, prosecutions, or convictions. It also does not state what action Meta has taken. Therefore, possible consequences must be described conditionally. Confirmation could lead to further criminal proceedings, but the investigation has not yet established guilt or a final outcome.

Social-media platforms typically combine automated detection with user reports and specialist safety teams. Automated systems can compare uploaded files with known illegal-content fingerprints and identify suspicious patterns. Human reviewers may assess flagged material under strict safeguards. The goal is to remove access quickly while reducing mistaken removals.

When content is confirmed or strongly suspected, platforms generally disable sharing, restrict accounts, preserve relevant metadata, and report the case to the appropriate law-enforcement authorities. Evidence can include links, account details, timestamps, and copies or fingerprints handled securely. Investigators can then request or use that information through lawful processes.

The article does not describe Meta’s specific detection, removal, or reporting procedures in this case. It only says the complaint concerned around 10 links on Meta platforms and that Delhi Police is investigating. Practices vary by platform and jurisdiction. Protecting children requires fast intervention, careful evidence preservation, and safeguards against exposing victims or redistributing abusive material.