Madras High Court
J.Selvam vs The State Rep. By on 12 February, 2015
Author: C.T.Selvam
Bench: C.T.Selvam
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 12.02.2015
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM
Crl.O.P.(MD).No.21351 of 2014
J.Selvam ...Petitioner
-Vs-
1.The State rep. By
The Inspector of Police,
C-1, Thideer Nagar Police Station, (L & O)
Madurai.
Cr.No.393 of 2008 ...Respondent/Complainant
2.Thirumal Alagu,
The Inspector of Police,
C-1, Thideer Nagar Police Station, (L & O)
Madurai. ...Respondent/Defacto complainant
PRAYER
Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
to call for the records in connection with the impugned charge sheet in
C.C.No.78 of 2010, pending trial on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, No.V, Madurai and quash the same.
***
!For Petitioners : Mr.N.R.Elango, Senior Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.K.Anbarasan
G.A (Crl.Side) for R-1
No appearance for R-2
:ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition seeks quash of charge-sheet, which was taken on file in C.C.No.78 of 2010, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.V, Madurai.
2.Heard the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (criminal side).
3.The offences alleged against the petitioner/Accused No.1 are under Sections 292 (A) (C) of I.P.C, Section 15(3) of Tamil Nadu Exhibition of Films on TV Screen through VCR and through Cable TV Network Act, 1984, Section 7 (1) (a) of Cinematography Act and Section 68(A) of Copy Right Act.
4.In the presence of the Assistant Commissioner of Police (Law and Order), the second respondent/Inspector of Police visited the Internet Cafe of the petitioner on 08.03.2008 and found that 'unauthorized obscene content was kept in the computer and the same was exhibited through internet', without having any permission.
5.It is the prosecution case that this petitioner, as the owner of the Internet cafe caused telecast of pornographic and obscene contents in his Internet cafe. The cellphone seized from the petitioner was also found containing obscene content. The employees of the petitioner had informed that the telecast had been effected on the instructions of the petitioner.
6.Perused the papers, 161(3) Cr.P.C statements and also the counter filed by the first respondent.
7.Learned Senior Counsel for petitioner submitted that as an Internet Cafe owner, petitioner merely collected a fee from customers towards use of computers for accessing the Internet. He had no control over what was accessed by the customers.
8.It is the not the prosecution case that any computer disc containing obscene materials was seized from petitioner. In such case, there might be reason to doubt that petitioner was causing display of such materials on his computer screen. Petitioner cannot have any control over contents accessed by customers. We are not aware of the any rule or requirement of law that C.T.SELVAM, J.
vs would permit him to do so. In fact, his doing so would be an invasion into the privacy of customers.
9.This Criminal Original petition stands allowed and accordingly, the proceedings in C.C.No.78 of 2010, pending trial on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, No.V, Madurai stands quashed. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2014 is closed.
12.02.2015 vs To
1.The Judicial Magistrate, No.V, Madurai.
2.The Inspector of Police, C-1, Thideer Nagar Police Station, (L & O) Madurai.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai.
Crl.O.P.(MD).No.21351 of 2014