Analysis Of Obscene Publications
ANALYSIS OF OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS
✅ Statutory Basis
In India, the regulation of obscene publications is mainly governed by:
1. Section 292, Indian Penal Code (IPC)
This section defines obscenity and prescribes punishment for:
Sale, distribution, public exhibition, circulation of obscene material.
Import, export, advertisement of obscene content.
Definition of Obscenity (Section 292 IPC)
A publication is deemed obscene if it is:
Lascivious, or
Appeals to prurient interests, or
Tends to deprave or corrupt persons who are likely to read, see, or hear the matter contained or embodied in it.
However, Section 292 includes exceptions, such as material justified for the public good, in the interest of:
Science
Literature
Art
Learning
2. Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986
Prohibits indecent representation of women in publications, advertisements, etc.
3. Information Technology Act, 2000
Section 67: Punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form.
Section 67A & 67B: More severe provisions related to sexually explicit content and child pornography.
TESTS APPLIED BY COURTS TO DETERMINE OBSCENITY
🔹 1. Hicklin Test (Older Test)
Adopted from a British case.
Determines whether the material tends to "deprave and corrupt" those whose minds may be open to immoral influences.
🔹 2. Community Standards Test
Modern test developed by the Indian Supreme Court. Considers:
Contemporary social values
Overall message of the work
Dominant effect of the publication
🔹 3. Average Person / Overall Effect Test
The material must be judged as a whole, not isolated parts.
IMPORTANT CASE LAWS (DETAILED EXPLANATION)
Below are six landmark cases explaining obscenity law in India.
1. Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (1965)
Facts:
A bookseller was prosecuted for selling an unexpurgated copy of “Lady Chatterley’s Lover,” a novel containing explicit sexual descriptions.
Issue:
Whether the book was “obscene” under Section 292 IPC.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held the book obscene and upheld the conviction.
Principles Laid Down:
Adopted the Hicklin Test in India.
Emphasized balancing freedom of speech with public morality.
Even literary merit cannot save a book if the “tendency to deprave and corrupt” exists.
2. Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal (2014)
Facts:
A German magazine photograph of Boris Becker (tennis player) and his fiancée posing nude was republished in an Indian magazine. Case filed for obscenity.
Issue:
Does a nude photograph automatically amount to obscenity?
Judgment:
Supreme Court acquitted the accused and held the image not obscene.
Principles Laid Down:
Rejected the old Hicklin Test.
Adopted the Community Standards Test.
Nudity per se is not obscene.
Must consider context, social message, and overall impact.
3. Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon (1996) (Bandit Queen Case)
Facts:
The film Bandit Queen, based on Phoolan Devi’s life, contained scenes of nudity and sexual violence. An objection was raised that this violated obscenity laws.
Issue:
Whether artistic portrayal of sexual violence amounts to obscenity.
Judgment:
Supreme Court allowed the movie’s release.
Principles Laid Down:
Scenes of nudity or sexual violence must be examined in context.
The film depicted brutality and social reality, not meant to arouse lust.
Material intended for public good, especially to expose injustice, is not obscene.
4. Chandrakant Kalyandas Kakodkar v. State of Maharashtra (1969)
Facts:
A Marathi novelist was prosecuted for writing allegedly obscene short stories.
Issue:
Should literary works be judged by specific vulgar passages or the entire work?
Judgment:
Conviction overturned; the work considered not obscene.
Principles Laid Down:
Emphasized judging the work as a whole, not isolated lines.
Courts must consider the age, social background, and maturity of readers.
Literary works often contain depiction of sex which is not automatically obscene.
5. S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010)
Facts:
Actress Khushboo made statements supporting premarital sex. Several cases filed alleging obscenity and defamation.
Issue:
Does expressing support for premarital sex amount to obscenity?
Judgment:
Supreme Court quashed all criminal complaints.
Principles Laid Down:
Freedom of speech protects expression of unconventional ideas.
Obscenity requires a prurient element, not just controversial social opinion.
Public morality cannot be basis to silence speech unless it violates Section 292 IPC.
6. Ajay Goswami v. Union of India (2007)
Facts:
Petitioner sought restrictions on newspapers for publishing sexually explicit images and news.
Issue:
Should the Supreme Court restrict newspapers on the grounds of obscenity?
Judgment:
Court refused to issue blanket restrictions.
Principles Laid Down:
Newspapers follow self-regulation under the Press Council of India.
Courts must avoid over-censorship as it harms free speech.
Obscenity must be judged by contemporary community standards.
SUMMARY OF KEY PRINCIPLES (EASY FOR EXAM ANSWERS)
✔ Obscenity must appeal to prurient interest
✔ Judged as a whole (not isolated passages)
✔ Community Standards Test is the modern approach
✔ Context and purpose matter (art, literature, education)
✔ Nudity ≠ Obscenity automatically
✔ Freedom of expression protected unless material is clearly corrupting
RELATED Blog
comments