APOORVA ARORA & ANR. ETC. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

APOORVA ARORA & ANR. ETC. versus STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR.

On the facts and on proper legal principles the impugned portions, when judged in context of the web-series as a whole and by the standard of an ordinary reasonable person, do not arouse prurient interest nor tend to deprave and corrupt; profanity and vulgar expletives alone are not obscene and there is no allegation of a sexually explicit act or conduct to attract Section 67A; therefore the High Court erred and the FIR under Sections 67 and 67A IT Act was quashed.

Parties
Appellants: Apoorva Arora & Anr. Etc.; Respondents: State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 March 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Judgment Dismissing Petition Under Section 482 Cr PC and Directing Registration of FIR Under Sections 67 and 67 A, IT Act
Outcome
Appeals allowed; High Court judgment set aside; FIR quashed
Legal Topics
Obscenity, Sexually Explicit Content, Web Series, Community Standard Test, Quashing of FIR, Application of Sections 67 and 67 a IT Act
Information Technology Act, 2000 Penal Code, 1860 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Indecent Representation of Women (prohibition) Act, 1986 Constitutional Law — Freedom of Speech and Expression Obscenity Sexually Explicit Content Web Series +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Apoorva Arora & Anr. Etc.

Appellants

State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Judgment Dismissing Petition Under Section 482 Cr PC and Directing Registration of FIR Under Sections 67 and 67 A, IT Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether use of expletives and profane language in web-series episodes constitutes publication/transmission of obscene material under Section 67 IT Act
  2. 2 Whether the material contains a 'sexually explicit act or conduct' attracting Section 67A IT Act
  3. 3 Proper test to determine obscenity (Hicklin vs community standard) and the correct standard of the reasonable viewer

Ratio Decidendi

On the facts and on proper legal principles the impugned portions, when judged in context of the web-series as a whole and by the standard of an ordinary reasonable person, do not arouse prurient interest nor tend to deprave and corrupt; profanity and vulgar expletives alone are not obscene and there is no allegation of a sexually explicit act or conduct to attract Section 67A; therefore the High Court erred and the FIR under Sections 67 and 67A IT Act was quashed.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; High Court judgment set aside; FIR quashed

Orders

  • Appeals allowed
  • Judgment of the High Court dated 06.03.2023 in CRLMC Nos. 2399/2020, 2215/2020 and 2214/2020 set aside