Online Defamation, Impersonation & Cyber Harassment -- BNS, IT Act & Takedown Remedies

The overlapping statutory framework

Online misconduct in India is rarely governed by a single provision. Defamation -- making or publishing a false statement that harms someone’s reputation -- is addressed by Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), the criminal-law successor to the erstwhile Indian Penal Code’s defamation provisions, alongside the pre-existing civil law remedy of a defamation suit for damages and injunction. Impersonation and identity theft -- creating a fake profile, using someone’s photo or name without consent, or using a stolen digital identity to deceive -- are addressed by BNS Sections 318 and 319 (cheating and personation) together with Sections 66C (identity theft) and 66D (cheating by personation using a computer resource) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Stalking and harassment, including persistent unwanted contact, monitoring someone’s online activity, or threatening messages, are addressed by Section 78 BNS (stalking) and Section 66E of the IT Act (violation of privacy, including through unauthorized capture or circulation of images). In practice, police FIRs for online misconduct frequently invoke several of these provisions together, since a single incident -- a fake profile used to harass someone, for instance -- can simultaneously constitute impersonation, harassment, and defamation.

Getting content taken down -- a separate, often faster route

Independent of pursuing a criminal complaint or civil suit, a victim can seek removal of defamatory, impersonating, or harassing content directly from the platform. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 require significant social media intermediaries to appoint a Grievance Officer and act on a complaint -- including complaints about content that is defamatory, invasive of privacy, or impersonates another person -- generally within specified timelines (with expedited timelines for certain categories such as non-consensual intimate imagery). Where a platform does not act, or for urgent situations, victims can also approach a court for an injunction directing takedown, and in some cases obtain a “John Doe” (Ashok Kumar) order against unidentified parties where the identity of the poster is not yet known. Reporting to the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (cybercrime.gov.in) is also a practical parallel step, since it can trigger both investigative action and, in fraud-adjacent cases, faster coordination with platforms and banks.

Practical considerations for NRIs facing this from abroad

An NRI who is defamed, impersonated, or harassed online -- whether the harasser is in India or also abroad -- generally does not need to be physically present in India to report the matter or pursue a complaint. FIRs and complaints can typically be initiated online through the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal, and many state police cyber cells accept complaints electronically, though follow-up steps (statements, evidence verification) may sometimes need coordination with a local representative or advocate. Jurisdiction can become a genuinely complex question when either the perpetrator, the platform’s servers, or the victim is located outside India, and cross-border enforcement of any resulting order or judgment against a person or platform based abroad is not automatic -- NRIs facing a serious or ongoing situation are generally well advised to preserve evidence (screenshots, URLs, timestamps) immediately and consult a lawyer familiar with both the relevant Indian provisions and, where applicable, the law of the country where the perpetrator or platform is based.