Despite it being practised in India, sexting among teens has not received much attention in legal and societal discourse. Legitimate fears of abuse that can traumatise young users make regulation necessary. But must this necessarily be at the cost of children’s sexual expressions? In this essay we analyse Indian pornography laws to explore whether sexting always constitutes child pornography in the background of Karl Hanson’s classification of the ‘Schools of Thoughts in Children’s Rights.’: Paternalism, Liberation, Welfare and Emancipation. We argue that current jurisprudence on sexting takes a paternalistic stance and that rather than classifying teen-sexting into blanket ‘pornography or not’ camps, it requires a more nuanced approach.