Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(e) It is pertinent to note here that, the offence of outraging the modesty under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, is said to be committed when a person assaults or causes criminal force to a women intending to outrage or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby outrage her modesty. It is to be noted here that, in the absence of any clear and unimpeachable evidence, the offence under section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, does not attract.

(f) It is pertinent to note here that, section 67(B) of Information Technology contemplates as under- Whoever- (a) publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted material in any electronic form which depicts children engaged in sexually explicit act or conduct; or

(b) creates text or digital images, collects, seeks, browses, downloads, advertises, promotes, exchanges or distributes material in any electronic form depicting children in obscene or indecent or sexually explicit manner; or

(c) cultivates, entices or induces children to online relationship with one or more children for and on sexually explicit act or in a manner that may offend a reasonable adult on the computer resource; or

(d) facilitates abusing children online; or

(e) records in any electronic form own abuse or that of others pertaining to sexually explicit act with children shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees and in the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees.

It is pertinent to note here that, aforesaid section deals with the punishment for publishing, or transmitting of material depicting children in sexually explicit act, etc., in electronic form. It is pertinent to note here that, to bring the home the charge under said section the prosecution has to establish that the accused has published, transmitted, created or facilitated any material in any electronic form which depicts children engaged in sexually explicit act or conduct. It is pertinent to note here that, the word children used in aforesaid section means a person who has not completed the age of 18 years.

It is to be noted here that, in the instant case PW1 has deposed that on alleged date of incident PW2 was a minor. It is to be noted here that, as discussed above to bring home the charge under section 293 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 67(B) of the Information Technology Act, it is the bounden duty of the prosecution to prove that the accused has published, transmitted, created or facilitated any material in any electronic form which depicts children engaged in sexually explicit act or conduct and on alleged date of incident the victim was minor. It is to be noted here that, in the instant case the prosecution has not produced any document to show that on the alleged date of incident PW2 was minor and in view of the same section 293 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 67(B) of the Information Technology Act, go out from the purview.