"Possessing 183 Files": Delhi Court Convicts Man In Child Sexual Abuse Material Case

The Court held that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) successfully proved its case “beyond reasonable doubt.”

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Jyoti Maheshwari of Rouse Avenue Court pronounced the judgment on June 11, noting, “It is evident that the prosecution has successfully proved the commission of the alleged offence by the accused, Anurag Sharma, beyond reasonable doubt.”

The matter has now been listed for a sentencing hearing on July 3.

Case Background and CBI Probe

The CBI had registered a complaint against Anurag Sharma on September 27, 2015, alleging his involvement in collecting, browsing, downloading, and distribution of material depicting children in sexually explicit acts through the internet. Subsequently, a formal FIR was lodged on October 27, 2016, under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

During the investigation, the CBI recovered a laptop and a modem from Sharma’s residence. The digital devices were forensically examined at the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (CDAC), which confirmed the possession of numerous files, a total of 183, featuring children in sexually exploitative content.

Evidence from the CDAC's analysis demonstrated that the files were downloaded and stored in the “E” drive of Sharma’s hard disk. The path of these files, alongside their content, made it clear that the material was downloaded, collected, and preserved by Sharma himself.

The CBI further explained that during the years 2015 and 2016, Sharma was engaged in the collection and downloading of child sexual abuse material in electronic form, thereby contravening Section 67B (b) of the Information Technology Act.

Defence's Argument Rejected by Court

During trial, the defence challenged the investigation on two grounds; first, that the destination IP of the URLs and the sexually explicit material were not investigated by the CBI; and second, this information was not mentioned in the CDAC report.

However, the Court dismissed these arguments, stating, “Section 67B of IT Act does not mandate any investigation or recovery of the destination IP; it only requires that the accused should have browsed, collected or downloaded the material, in electronic form, involving children in sexually explicit acts.”

The judgment underscores that possession, collection, and downloading of CSAM itself constitutes an offence under Section 67B (b), regardless of whether the destination IPs were investigated or not.

Evidence Against Sharma

The CBI's case was primarily supported by the recovery of 183 files from Sharma’s hard disk, files that undeniably fell under the definition of “child sexually exploitative and abuse material (CSEAM).”

The path of these files and their storage on the hard disk provided clear proof of their collection and possession by the accused. Furthermore, the CDAC's forensic analysis confirmed the downloaded content was sexually explicit and involved children, a key ingredient for securing conviction under Section 67B (b).

Conclusion and Next Course of Action

Having convicted Anurag Sharma under Section 67B (b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, the court has scheduled July 3 for arguments on the quantum of sentence.