Saying Bas**rd not obscenity: The Supreme Court of India, in a landmark ruling on criminal jurisprudence, has held that hurling abuses such as ‘bas**rd’ during an altercation does not constitute obscenity under Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). A bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra noted that for an offence under Section 294 to be made out, the words must carry a clear sexual or prurient element. They added that mere vulgarity, or abuse, is insufficient. [caption id="attachment_2448" align="alignnone" width="1200"]
Representative image[/caption]The court underscored that such expressions are often used in modern-day arguments and do not necessarily arouse sexual interest. It then set aside the conviction of the accused in the case.
Court overturns conviction in property dispute
The court made the ruling while hearing an appeal against a decision of the Madras High Court (HC), which had convicted two persons under Section 294(b) IPC. The case stemmed from a family dispute over a shared property boundary. An altercation broke out when a man attempted to fence the land, during which the accused allegedly hurled the contentious term at him, leading to their conviction for obscenity.
The accused contended before the court that the offence was wrongly applied, while the State argued that the abusive language attracted legal provisions. The bench trashed the state’s stance, ruling that the word in question lacked any sexual undertone and therefore, could not be classified as obscene.
[caption id="attachment_2449" align="alignnone" width="1200"]
Supreme Court[/caption]What constitutes obscenity? Apex Court sheds light
The court clarified that the term’ obscene’ is not explicitly defined in the IPC. However, it drew guidance from Section 292, which links obscenity with content that appeals to prurient interest. The bench then referred to the Apporva Arora vs State, reiterating that obscenity pertains to material capable of arousing sexual or lustful thoughts, not language that merely offends or shocks. Holding that distasteful and uncivil expressions do not meet the legal threshold, the bench remarked, “Vulgarity and profanities do not per se amount to obscenity.” With the ruling, the Apex Court firmly concluded that the provision was not attracted in the present case, providing relief to the accused while setting a precedent for similar disputes in the future.Also read: MP HC upholds woman’s right to reside with partner amid dispute with husband, junks spouse’s plea