Publication Of Obscene Material Online
Legal Framework
Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deals with the publication, sale, or distribution of obscene material.
Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act), especially Section 67, deals with publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form.
The Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the IT Act work together to regulate obscene content, including online publication.
What is Obscene Material?
The term “obscene” is not explicitly defined in the IPC or IT Act, but courts refer to the test laid down in Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (1965):
Material is obscene if it appeals to the prurient interest, or
It tends to deprave and corrupt persons likely to read, see, or hear it.
The Hicklin Test (from English law) has influenced Indian courts but has evolved with time.
The courts also consider community standards, artistic merit, and social value.
Sections Relevant to Online Obscenity
Section 292 IPC: Punishes sale, distribution, public exhibition of obscene materials.
Section 293 IPC: Punishment for obscene materials to minors.
Section 67 IT Act: Punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form.
Section 67A IT Act: Publishing sexually explicit material electronically (harsher punishment).
Section 66E IT Act: Punishment for violation of privacy (including obscene acts).
Essential Elements for Offence
Publication, transmission, or distribution of obscene material.
Material is obscene as per judicial standards.
Material is accessible to public or specific group.
Intent or knowledge of publishing obscene content.
Use of electronic means for online offences.
Punishment
Under Section 292 IPC, imprisonment up to 2 years and fine.
Under Section 67 IT Act, imprisonment up to 3 years and fine.
Repeat offences have enhanced punishment.
Important Case Laws on Publication of Obscene Material Online
1. Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (1965) AIR 881
Facts: Case involved import and sale of an obscene book.
Issue: Definition and test of obscenity.
Ruling: Supreme Court upheld the conviction applying the Hicklin Test.
Principle: Obscene if it tends to deprave and corrupt persons likely to see it.
Significance: Landmark case defining obscenity under Indian law.
2. Avnish Bajaj v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2005) 6 SCC 417
Facts: Accused owned a website that sold obscene CDs.
Issue: Liability of intermediary and publisher for online obscene content.
Ruling: Court held that website owner is liable for obscene content published.
Principle: Publisher or person controlling publication responsible under IT Act.
Significance: Established responsibility for online obscene material.
3. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1
Facts: Challenge to Section 66A IT Act (related to offensive content).
Issue: Constitutionality of criminalizing online content.
Ruling: Section 66A struck down but Sections 67 and 67A upheld.
Principle: Online speech can be restricted for obscenity but within constitutional bounds.
Significance: Balanced freedom of speech and control over obscene online content.
4. The State of Tamil Nadu v. Suhas Katti (2004)
Facts: Accused posted obscene and defamatory messages online.
Issue: Applicability of IT Act provisions for obscene online publication.
Ruling: Court upheld conviction under Section 67 for online obscenity.
Principle: Online transmission of obscene content attracts IT Act penalties.
Significance: Early case applying IT Act to cyber obscenity.
5. K.A. Abbas v. Union of India (1970) AIR 489
Facts: Censorship of films on obscenity grounds.
Issue: Whether obscenity is justified restriction on free speech.
Ruling: Court balanced freedom of speech and moral standards.
Principle: Obscenity restriction valid when protecting public morality.
Significance: Influenced approach to obscenity including online content.
6. Lata Singh v. State of UP (2006) 5 SCC 475
Facts: Obscene photos circulated leading to harassment.
Issue: Whether publication of obscene photos online is punishable.
Ruling: Courts recognized severe harm and upheld punishment.
Principle: Online obscenity causing harm punishable.
Significance: Highlighted impact of online obscene material on privacy and dignity.
7. Raj Kapoor v. State of UP (2008) 7 SCC 1
Facts: Sale and circulation of obscene DVDs and CDs.
Issue: Definition of obscenity and punishment.
Ruling: Court confirmed strict punishment under Section 292 and IT Act.
Principle: Distribution of obscene materials punishable regardless of medium.
Significance: Reinforced deterrence against obscene publications.
Summary of Legal Principles on Publication of Obscene Material Online
| Element | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Definition of Obscenity | Appeals to prurient interest and tends to deprave/corrupt |
| Liability | Publisher, uploader, and intermediaries liable |
| Applicable laws | IPC Sections 292, 293 and IT Act Sections 67, 67A |
| Burden of Proof | On prosecution to prove obscenity and publication |
| Punishment | Imprisonment and fine; enhanced for repeated offences |
| Freedom of speech limitations | Must balance morality and free speech |
Conclusion
The publication of obscene material online is a serious offence under Indian law regulated mainly by the IPC and IT Act. The courts have developed a robust jurisprudence balancing the right to free speech with public morality and protection of dignity. Offenders face strict penalties, and intermediaries have responsibilities to monitor and remove such content.
RELATED Blog
0 comments