LexGITA RAM & ANR. versus STATE OF H.P.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B (2013] 1 S.C.R. 698 GITA RAM & ANR. v. STATE OF H.P. (Criminal Appeal No. 227 of 2013) FEBRUARY 1, 2013 [T.S. THAKUR AND M.Y. EQBAL, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: c s.292 read withs. 34 /PC ands. 7 of Cinematograph Act - Display of obscene films to young viewers - Conviction - Plea of accused for release uls 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act - Held: In view of the dichotomy of punishments introduced by Legislature in s.292 /PC for first offenders and 0 subsequent offenders, sentence of one month's simple imprisonment with fine, needs no interference - Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - s.4 - Cinematograph Act, 1952 - s. 7. The allegations against the appellants of showing blue films to young viewers on CD player were found to E have been proved. They were convicted u/s 292 read with s. 34 IPC and s.7 of Cinematograph Act. The sentence of six months simple imprisonment was reduced by the appellate court to one month each. The F G H High Court dismissed appellants' revision petition. In the instant appeal, the appellants pleaded for their release on probation u/s 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: Section 292, IPC was amended in 1969 whereby a dichotomy of penal treatment was introduced for dealing with the first offenders and the subsequent offenders. The intention of the Legislature while 698 GITA RAM & ANR. v. STATE OF H.P. 699 amending the provision, is to deal with this type of A . offences which corrupt the mind of the people to whom objectionable things can easily reach, and such corrupting influence is more likely to be upon the younger generation who has got to be protected from being easy prey. In the facts and circumstances of the case and also B considering the nature of the activities and the offence committed by the appellants, this Court is unable to show any leniency and to modify the sentence any further. [para 9 and 11] [702-G-H; 704-E] Uttam Singh vs. The State (Delhi Administration 197 4 (3) C SCR 722 = 1974 (4) SCC 590; Bharat Bhushan vs. State of Punjab 1999 (2) RCR (Criminal) 148 - relied on Case Law Reference: 1974 (3) SCR 722 relied on 1999 (2) RCR (Criminal) 148 relied on para 9 para 10 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 227 of 2013. From the Judgment & Order dated 21.11.2011 of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in Criminal Revision No. 36 of 2006. D •E Shweta Garg, Rakesh Garg, A.G. Garg for the Appellants. F Naresh K. Sharma for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.Y. EQBAL, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal by special leave arises out of the judgment and order dated 21.11.2011 of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in CRLR No. 36/2006. Notice was issued on the limited question of sentence in a conviction of .the G H 700 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 1 S.C.R. A appellants under Section 292 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 7 of Cinematograph Act. 3. The prosecution case was that on 07.12.2001 on the basis of secret information the patrolling party raided the 8 premises in Dhawan Video Hall, Sai Road and found that the appellants were showing blue film to young men and about 15 viewers were there in the hall. It was alleged that CD of blue film, namely "Size Matter'' was displayed by the appellants to the viewers on Videocon TV Sony C.D. player, one CD namely "Size Matter", two C.Ds. of "Jawani Ka Khel", remote, ticket C book, T.V. and poster were taken into possession in the presence of the witnesses. 4. The appellants were charged for offences punishable under Section 292 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 7 of D Cinematograph Act. 5. After the statements of the appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. the trial began and, finally on completion of trial the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate E convicted and sentenced the appellants to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months under Section 292 of the IPC and fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 7 of Cinematograph Act. 6. On appeal filed by the appellants, the Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track Court, Solan Camp at Nalagarh F affirmed the judgment passed by the Trial Court. However, the appellants being first offenders Sessions Judge showed some leniency in sentence of imprisonment and instead of imprisonment of 6 months the appellants were sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month each. The sentence G aw
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.