National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) is developing a social media code of conduct to strengthen safeguards for children online, according to the Hindustan Times. The code will cover platforms including Instagram, Facebook, X and Snapchat. NCPCR is preparing it with MeitY, DoT, I4C and social media companies. Civil society organisations are also involved in the process. The development follows a MeitY consultation on social media age restrictions for children.

The consultation, held on August 20, examined age-gating, platform regulation and possible legal frameworks. Discussions also considered whether existing laws provide adequate protections for children. Participants examined whether new legislation, provisions under the IT Act or guidelines were necessary. The consultation was held against a backdrop of growing international debate over children’s access to social media.

What happened at the consultation? The two-hour consultation took place on August 20 at MeitY’s office in New Delhi. MeitY Secretary S Krishnan chaired the closed-door roundtable with Space2Grow and civil society organisations.

Attendees included NCPCR, Centre for Social Research, Counsel to Secure Justice and Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy. J-PAL, Enfold, Responsible Netism, The Quantum Hub, Just Rights and Internet Freedom Foundation also attended.

From MeitY, Cyber Laws Division Group Coordinator Deepak Goel and Scientist E Dr S Sathyanarayanan attended alongside Krishnan. The meeting was originally scheduled for July 27 but was postponed because of Parliament’s monsoon session.

What was discussed? Participants discussed age-gating and platform regulation during the consultation. They also discussed a legally enforceable duty of care for platforms. Several organisations advocated safety by design for social media services.

The consultation also found that a complete social media ban for children would not be effective. Presentations highlighted risks beyond social media, including AI chatbots and gaming platforms. Participants also shared information about parental controls and their effectiveness.

Furthermore, organisations proposed longitudinal research into Indian children’s internet use and online harms. Krishnan agreed to the proposal, according to people familiar with the consultation.

Participants also proposed consulting children directly during future discussions. They said children should be treated as rights-bearers, rather than merely as victims.

Meanwhile, NCPCR’s proposed code will function as guidelines. However, NCPCR could use its statutory powers under the CPCR Act in case of violations.

Why a blanket restriction is a blunt instrument: Blanket bans risk cutting children off from information, communities and opportunities to participate online. They may also disproportionately affect young people from underserved communities. At MediaNama’s July 31 Delhi roundtable, a 17-year-old YLAC member said, “When we’re talking about people from isolated, underserved, and underprivileged communities, and when we talk about restricting social media, we’re talking about isolating them from vast sources of knowledge and information.”

Meanwhile, young people questioned whether age-verification systems could prevent access effectively. One participant said, “When we’re talking about age estimation, we also need to acknowledge that young people are smarter than you give them credit for, and we’re very good at finding alternative avenues.”

The restrictions could also remove online spaces where young people discuss identity and seek information. One participant said, “when your immediate family and the people around you won’t understand, the internet is where you’ll go.”

More information on the consultation: MediaNama reached out to Space2Grow for more information about the consultation. The organisation said it is not commenting on the consultation for now. We have also filed an RTI with MeitY regarding the minutes of the meeting. The article will be updated when we receive a response.

Questions in the RTI:
Under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, I request the following information in relation to the consultation reportedly held by MeitY on 20 August 2026 concerning social media restrictions / age-related restrictions for children:

1. A copy of the agenda, notice, invitation, concept note, presentation, background note or briefing note prepared for or circulated in relation to the consultation.

2. A copy of the minutes, record of discussion, proceedings, attendance sheet/list of participants, summary note, action-taken points, or any equivalent record prepared during or after the consultation.

3. Copies of written submissions, representations, comments, emails, memoranda or other documents received from participants or stakeholders in connection with the consultation.

4. Copies of any internal note, file noting, summary, report, recommendation, decision memo or follow-up document prepared by MeitY on the basis of the consultation.

5. If no minutes or record of discussion were prepared, please provide the file noting/order/communication recording that fact.

This request is limited to existing records held by or under the control of MeitY. If any part of a record attracts an exemption, please provide the remaining non-exempt portions after severance under Section 10 of the RTI Act, with reasons for each redaction. Personal mobile numbers, email addresses, signatures, residential addresses or other purely personal identifiers may be redacted. I am seeking institutional records concerning a public consultation and policy-making process, not personal information.

If the information is held by another public authority or division, please transfer the application or the relevant part under Section 6(3) of the RTI Act and inform me accordingly.

Also read: