Sri Deepankar Chowdari S/O T N Chowdari vs The State Of Karnataka on 31 March, 2008

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Deepankar Chowdari S/O T N Chowdari vs The State Of Karnataka on 31 March, 2008

Bench: K.Bhakthavatsala

 

CILP No.S579I2ﬂ0'7

IN THE HIGH -COURT on KARNATAICA AT BANGAis<§E§E 

DATED 'runs mm: 31» our on MARCH    

BEFORE 

1-an uonrnu: nn. JUITIOI.    
cmmmm. PE-l'l'l'lO!w1_. nio§5;s7912oa7%%k_1    %

IITWBIH:

1. Sri Dcepankar chowami, 
8/0 T N Chawdari.

Agc:23years, ._ 

Odo: Student, .

Residing at No.4 15,1
Ranganatha Nilayé, " ~..

19"' Main, ..

6"' Cross, , -------- ~   4:,  
Behind ME! 'I: 

 e7j%3.k %
2. ad Suhqiit R63,"

at N§~L4=5;'«
Rm13"!W%h¢!%"ﬂ»93n;  " 2
 MEI  Sﬂcdhalli.

3.' Sr:  .
'S/'c-P -K'.D9_;a,
24

 Bone mu.



C!rI.P No.5579l'2007

Siddaramaiah Road. 

(By Sti Sanlect M Yenagi. Adv., for petitioner!)

Thestateofxarnataka. V

Reptd. by the Sub-Inspector of Polin.I_=;'~ 

Peenya Police Station. ..  _

Peenya, _     
Bangalore-560 058. .    "  _ V  Respondent

(By 31-1 A v Ramakrishna. mp, This C1'iminaI:».P§titiorJ isﬁiad Section 482 of the Code of Criminal order dated 6.1.2006 at Annezmme-I13 -t1:e--.Cenrt_q£ VII Addl. C M M Bangalore of taking of me' by registering the case as C C 71712006 the_pm'sant-.._p"eﬂﬁonem, and quash the proceedings ofC c No.717[QQO6., M Petition for Admission, the same having been for pronouncement of Oniers, the Court made the.

The peiitsoncm/accused in c c No.717I2006 on the tile orvu . V. Metmpolitan Magistmte. Bangalore. for the offence at under Section 292 ofthe Indian Penal Code. are before this ' 2' . A praying for quashing the proceedings in C C No.717[2006.

L. CrLP No.5579I2007-

2. The briefihete ofthe case leading to the min; under Section 432 ofCr. P.C., may be-stated as ' t;eI _ It is the case of the hf No1to3 an-. the students of Bangalore. The accused No.1 at No.415, Ranganatha Nilaya, 19:1» I Layout at Bangalore. On police raided the residence of the t1.3O a.m., and found the accused the computer of Accused N01. The "aha 3-cm. After investigation. the H charge sheet against the etfenee punishable under section 292 of v4_ase.»ef'tl1e...vpetitioners that they have not committed the them and they have prauredfor quaehing the No.717[2006 on the ﬁle of vn Add]. Chief ' leamed Counsel for petitioners submitted that the himself has investigated the cane and laid charge sheet thetefoxe charge sheet is not suetnma' ble in law. It is further L/t mp No.5s19I2oo7 contended that the petitioners/accused am not involtged in the process of production. distribution and exhibition of, ﬁlm; and private viewing of the same by the in personal computer does not constitute under Section 292 of! P C. Further. " 9' _ tight ofprivaey and right to libex'-'i:;r_eiab 21 of the Constitution of India. = . .

4. beamed Counsel cited a decision of neportcd in 1999 cm.{. L;u. tenonjenbbonawn AND omens ve. STATE or nAJAs1§:~wIjee ﬁcinit peeeeeeeen of the obeeene object is when P c. if the poeeeeeien is ibr the pu1'poae:'nf pubne exhibition 0!' o1mulation' . Ifthe obscene object.io"ke'ﬁt_in~ houee and' is not car sale, bbe. public cannot be ctuuwd under Section

5. 'Ctovemment Pleader submitted that the case was A ' '_byV'(3.W-1 Sxi. Bangarappa. P.S.I.. of Peenya Police Station. Cweﬁeesﬁ. C.G Rangaewnmy. P.S.l., who the case and Vv sheet. and therefore the first contention of the counsel ibr K, CILP No.5S'19I2007 the petitioners, holds no water. He further submits that the act of the accused falls within the mischief of Section 292 of! is no good ﬂmund for quaehins tbs pmeeedinsa % 'j % V' A

5. In view' of the arguments adtheeeee .;met % for the petitioners, a short queatixhi whether ptitvéiteh; ﬁlm constitutes an offence Section 292ofl.VF:C'R_ " V 7 ~

7. 2 is in the negative for the I'§is_useaf'1i1 at Section 292 at I P c for nnmed' iate _ under:

asagjaue. ete.. of eheeehe boob. ete.- (1) For ~. the purposes of sub-section (2). book. pamphlet, ' Wﬁﬁns. drawins. representation. ﬁgureoranyotherobject, shallbedeemed hobo obscene ifit is laacivious or appeals to the prurient interest or ifita eifect. or (where it comprises two or more distinct items) the eifect of any one of its CILP No.5579l200'I items. is. iftalum as a tend to dcpmvc and oorrup__t person who are likely. having-regard to all circumstances. to lead, we or hear the ~ V. contained or embodied in it.

(2) Whoever-

(a) sells. lets to h;iifc;.._V aiaiaahu¢¢a.Tl[pumic1ylll exhibit: or in &l*p-an ;'mo of diat:ibu1:ion.""p;i1l2litr for clmulniion.

any 5'? 38"" W W (cmphaain an l conveys any ob-cane A l9bjevct"'f9i*.§é1n3,ri"pf'thc pmposcs aﬁmeaaid. or to believe that such will be 3011!. lot to him.

dismbuma or publicly exhibited at in any «. put into circulation. or V (cl. part in or receive: proﬁts ﬁmn any business in the course orwmch he knows or hasmasontaobclieve thatanysuch obscene objects am. ibr any of tho puzpouco aforesaid. made. pmduced. pumhued. 139*» i1I|P°l1Dd- Gxported, oonvcynd. publicly L, CILP No.S57§If3III7 exhibited or in any mmmer put into cucula' tion. or

(d) advertises or makes known by any whatsoever that any person is L ready to engage in any act oﬂence under this "er obscene object can through any pexs0i_1'.~

(e) oﬂiers or attempts _io any an offence under be punished cﬁia: with impnaomnj e;nt.,:.of. for a warm and to two thousand of a second or with impnsomn' ent _ t' _of eitiicr. for a term which may em, and also with fine

v)vhic_hinay' to ﬁve thousand rupees.

V :*.tF}it=s:epﬁon.-- This section does not extend to- book. pamphlet. paper, writing, ~ painting. representation or ﬁgure-

(i) the publication of which is proved to be justified as being hr the public good on the ground that such hook, pamphlet. paper. writins. drawins.

1__t Crll' No.5579f2007 painting. repmsentation or ﬂame is in the interest of science. litetatmig art or learning or other objects general concern, or _. ' ' ' f f "J: ft *1 ' . ;

(in which is lnept or used T T mﬁgious purpogeﬂ. ' .& (bl any mpmacntai*?ﬁA~ T engraved, qr othettvioe 3 onor1'n- V. h 1958 (24 at 1958). at Vh idols, or kept or

-------- purpose.

8. 'l'heﬁgf_st learned Counsel for the petitioners is that the inmugatea the cane and mod chatgc htneet the case was investigated by CW-6 and laid A g _A V 9. of] P C was added in accordance with the a A 4: by the International Convention for the suppxeubn of. and name in. obscene pubhcat:on' ' a. signed' at L, Ctll' No.5S19I20D7 Gen:evaonbehalfoftheGovernorofGene1-alincouncilonthe lzmday of September 1923.

10. Madzan High Court in v. SUNDARRAJANt::Vtt.j't§I;tK"i'§_"(Iin_ to 1 has held that ifa blue ﬁlm is '&c.;p0IiaI£'v os accused, he cannot be convicted .0! 5 unless it is further proved that the selling or letting for \§!it];tout'..pt\ttit1ftj'*the or poeeession mentioned in Section 292t2)(o)toftt't? be convicted' for the offence rendered in the above-said by the Rajasthetn High Court in dagdtn1t e1tno1n,onnnto.« chums case. it was alleged "the 3 Circle Inspector teceived some information hcuee situated in Juwahat Nagar. Sri ~ 'tilharanjit at 5.30 pan. and noticed that four uone lady. viewing obscene ﬁlm an the mlevision He. thexefone, seized' the cassette , televnsio' n not theV.'ﬁ§R. and registered the case under Section 292 on P c 10 of the Rajasthan Video Film Regulation at Act, 1990. On completion of the investigation. the Police % 'eubmittedi a challan agent' at the accused pet-eons.

L\ I0 CILP No.S579I2001

11. It is aubmitted that Accused No.1 has got released in his thvour. But, no one hoe claimed the in the case. It is not the case of prosecution possessing the obscene ﬁlms for the T of circulation ct1c., as mmtioned in elmtae "2 292 of I.P.C. Thcrcfoxe. the act the viewdng obscene ﬁhn does not 292 of Indian penal code. The decision by the Counsel for the accused is on all the fours. The learned of offence under section are entitled to succeed 1_2f;,lh allowed and the proceedings in o%o%oo. on the ﬁle of vn Add]. Chief Metropolitan Z for the offence under aectiop 292 of|.P.C., is % sal-

Iudge

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court