Introduction 

The metaverse has transitioned from a speculative idea into a tangible and rapidly expanding space for social interaction, work, commerce and entertainment. The ‘metaverse’ is commonly used to describe networked, immersive 3D digital environments (often accessed through VR/AR, but also via PCs/phones) where users interact via avatars. This emerging digital architecture has the potential to democratise communication, transcend geographical boundaries and offer new economic opportunities. However, it also exposes users to complex and heightened forms of harm. Gender based violence, deeply rooted in social structures, has swiftly permeated these spaces. 

While conventional online harassment often involves oral, spoken, text or image-based abuse, the metaverse introduces embodied interaction. Users report that violations directed at their avatars feel like violations of their physical bodies. This is because virtual reality induces a heightened sense of presence where proximity, touch simulation, spatial audio and gestural interaction create psychological immersion. As a result, harassment in the metaverse generates trauma, fear and silencing effects comparable to those inflicted by physical assaults in the offline world. 

Evidence of this has already surfaced. In widely reported accounts, Nina Jane Patel described her avatar being groped/sexually harassed within about a minute of entering a VR social platform. She documented panic and dissociation as the event unfolded. In early January 2024, media reports said UK police were investigating allegations that a minor’s avatar was subjected to a ‘virtual gang rape’ in a VR environment. Media reports said UK police are investigating the allegations. 

This article examines how legal systems must respond to gender-based violence in the metaverse. The Indian framework is analysed first, followed by comparative developments in the United Kingdom, the European Union, Australia and the United States. The article argues that though current Indian law can be applied to immersive harms, doctrinal and regulatory gaps require urgent attention. 

Understanding Gender-based violence in Immersive Spaces: 

Techno-social nature of harm 

Technology facilitated gender-based violence (TFGBV) encompasses behaviours where technology is used to commit, enhance or sustain violence against women and people of marginalised genders. It includes sexual harassment, stalking, threats, image-based abuse, deepfakes and impersonation. When an avatar is subjected to groping or forced into sexual atrocities, the survivor experiences violation of bodily integrity and dignity. 

The VR (Virtual Reality) headsets also isolate users from real surroundings which could result in increased vulnerability.  Spatial audio also provides an avenue to the abusers to whisper threats in survivors. Haptic devices (technology that enables physical sensations) enable the simulation of touch. These technologies collapse the psychological separation between online and offline violence. 

Indian Legal Framework: 

Constitutional protections 

The Constitution of India establishes a foundational norm against gender-based discrimination. Articles 14 and 15 guarantee equality before the law and equal protection. Article 21, which protects dignity and personal liberty, has been interpreted to encompass psychological harm and privacy in digital environments. Gender-based violence in the metaverse directly undermines these rights by depriving women of safe participation in emerging public spheres. 

IPC and BNS application to violence in the metaverse  

Section 354D IPC (stalking) covers (i) repeatedly following and contacting/attempting to contact a woman to foster personal interaction despite clear disinterest, and (ii) monitoring a woman’s use of electronic communication; some persistent metaverse pursuit/contact may be argued by analogy depending on facts.  Depending on content and intent, abusive voice communications may attract offences such as Section 509 IPC (insult to modesty) and other applicable provisions (e.g., criminal intimidation). Indian courts have not yet squarely decided whether haptic/immersive ‘virtual groping’ satisfies elements of physical-contact offences; this remains a developing question. Experts in India and other nations argue that sexual assault legislation should evolve to protect not only physical interactions but also psychological and dignitary rights.  

Platform liability and the Information Technology Act of 2000  

The Information Technology Act plays a crucial role in tackling TFGBV in India. Sections 66C and 66D make identity theft and impersonation illegal, which are frequently used to create false representations of women. Section 66E punishes the invasion of privacy by capturing images without consent, which is particularly relevant to VR recordings. Sections 67, 67A, and 67B prohibit obscene material, sexually explicit conduct, and child sexual imagery, respectively.  

These laws are content-neutral regarding the medium, thereby applicable to immersive content. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, revised in 2023 and 2025, impose due diligence and grievance-redressal obligations and regulate removal/disablement processes (typically notice/order based), along with transparency requirements. Consequently, platforms catering to immersive user interactions and targeting Indian users must ensure effective content moderation in VR spaces. Nonetheless, enforcing regulations against platforms headquartered abroad remains a persistent difficulty.  

Protection of children  

POCSO criminalises sexually motivated conduct toward children, including (with sexual intent) showing pornographic material and repeatedly following/watching/contacting a child through electronic/digital means (Section 11), along with other offences. 

Workplace harassment and the expanded workplace under Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 (POSH Act). 

 Given the POSH Act’s broad ‘workplace’ definition (including any place visited in the course of employment), harassment in work-linked virtual interactions, such as virtual meetings, client calls, or employer-hosted VR events, can be addressed through POSH processes, depending on the facts. Employers may need to revise POSH policies to explicitly cover virtual environments and ensure that Internal Committees (ICs) are adequately trained to evaluate immersive evidence.  

Gaps and enforcement challenges  

Although Indian law offers extensive coverage, significant gaps persist. There is no clear acknowledgment of avatar-based violations as sexual offenses. Jurisdictional complications emerge when servers and offenders are situated abroad. Law enforcement and judicial systems lack the technical expertise to collect and analyze VR evidence. Victims encounter distinct evidentiary challenges since the psychological damage suffered in virtual settings often occurs without visible injuries. Furthermore, mechanisms for holding cyber platforms accountable are still inadequate.  

Comparative Legal Developments  

An international perspective on this topic may provide conceptual insights. The UK Online Safety Act 2023 imposes safety duties on regulated services; Ofcom has issued codes/guidance on online safety, including a dedicated focus on women and girls and safety-by-design principles. However, Ofcom’s published guidance is generally service-agnostic rather than metaverse/VR-specific. The European Union’s Digital Services Act outlines tiered responsibilities for online platforms to assess systemic risks, such as gender-based violence. Very large online platforms are required to audit their algorithms and content moderation practices to ensure they do not contribute to these harms. This approach fosters structural accountability rather than depending solely on user complaints. Australia has developed a thorough strategy through the eSafety Commissioner, who has released detailed guidelines regarding immersive technologies and has the authority to mandate the removal of harmful content. This strategy emphasizes safety by design, anticipating potential risks instead of just reacting to existing harms. In the US, Section 230 immunity remains a major feature of platform liability. Separately, in 2025, Congress passed the TAKE IT DOWN Act (S.146), creating a federal framework targeting nonconsensual intimate imagery (including certain AI-generated ‘digital forgeries’) and imposing removal obligations on covered platforms .These updates signal a shift towards holding digital platforms responsible for sexual harms, even those that arise from user-generated content. These differing legal frameworks highlight a movement away from focusing only on punitive actions to adopting proactive regulations that address the design and governance of digital spaces. 

Impact on Survivors and Society: 

The primary consequence of gender-based violence in the metaverse is withdrawal. Survivors report abandoning platforms altogether to avoid repeated harassment. This mirrors the chilling effect of gender-based street harassment, where women and queer and trans folx self-restrict their own movement and participation in social and public spaces. If the metaverse is expected to be the next phase of the internet, gendered exclusion at this early stage will have significant long-term consequences for equality in digital citizenship and future labour markets.  

Survivors report anxiety, intrusive memories and avoidance of technology, and studies show that cyber-sexual harassment leads to elevated anxiety and trauma symptoms among women (Iroegbu et al., 2024), with additional research linking such harassment to stress, depression and post-traumatic responses (Cripps & Stermac, 2018; Ståhl & Dennhag, 2021). The very possibility of such online abuse can deter participation in digital spaces, as evidenced by a national survey showing that women feel less comfortable speaking or expressing themselves online due to fears for their safety (Stevens et al., 2024). This mirrors the silencing effect of sexual harassment in workplaces and public environments, where women and gender minorities restrict their movements, expression and participation for self-protection. As a result, lack of safety in digital settings creates inequity in how gender minorities can use the internet for personal, educational or professional growth. Scholars examining technology-facilitated gender-based violence warn that without proactive legal safeguards, emerging immersive spaces such as the metaverse may replicate and amplify offline gender hierarchies and discrimination (Oliver et al., 2023; Sharmin & Kar, 2022). Therefore, the metaverse risks reproducing gender inequality within the next generation of the internet if the law does not intervene early.  

Psychologists caution that trauma incurred from virtual violations can be as severe as trauma from offline harassment because the brain encodes immersive experiences as if they were real. The trauma responses can range from loss of sleep and / or appetite, mood swings, hypervigilance in online settings, body image concerns, eating disorders, feelings of shame, guilt, alienation, self-harm and in some cases, even suicidal ideation. Furthermore, since VR engages the body more directly than text or image-based interactions, survivors report feelings of heightened distress. Yet they experience difficulty explaining their psychological state to law enforcement officials, with the fear that authorities may trivialise their experience. 

The Way Forward for India 

India stands at a critical juncture. India has discussed replacing/overhauling the IT Act through proposals sometimes referred to as a ‘Digital India Act’. Public information indicates reform aims to modernise digital regulation, but specific, enacted provisions on immersive/metaverse harms remain uncertain. Law reform should recognise avatar-targeted sexual violence where immersion creates infringement of bodily integrity. Clear statutory language will help ensure that courts do not discount victims’ trauma simply because physical contact is absent. Similarly, law enforcement officials should be sensitized to help them recognize that trauma from TFGBV is not in any way lesser than physical sexual assault. 

Regulatory improvements must also include obligations for metaverse platforms to conduct gender sensitive risk assessments, implement default distancing mechanisms, provide real time reporting tools, and ensure swift removal of harmful content. Policymakers must account for the high number of children accessing immersive platforms and impose strict age assurance and content controls.  

Capacity building is essential. Investigators and judges should be trained in evidence gathering from VR environments. Survivors must be offered trauma informed support. Public awareness campaigns can educate users about rights and reporting mechanisms in these spaces. 

Conclusion 

The metaverse represents an important evolution in the digital ecosystem. It promises new avenues for creativity, collaboration and economic participation. Yet, without appropriate safeguards, it risks becoming another realm where patriarchal power inflicts harm on women and gender minorities. Gender-based violence in virtual environments is not fictional or trivial; it is a profound breach of dignity and equality. Indian law possesses foundational principles that can be adapted to address immersive harms, but doctrinal advancements and regulatory innovation are urgently needed. 

A shift in attitude is necessary, amidst the tech innovators. Accountability must shift from user complaints triggering redressal, to innovators bringing in safety at the very blueprint level; where virtual platforms are designed in an inclusive way where users with marginalized identities feel welcome to participate in such digital environments without fear of violation. 

As the boundaries between physical and virtual lives blur, the law must evolve to protect individuals in both. Ensuring safety, respect and inclusion within the metaverse is essential for securing a future where technological progress does not reinforce existing hierarchies but instead opens equal opportunities for all. 

Written by Adv. Vamsi Mohana and Usri Basistha, reviewed by Rosanna Rodrigues