LexS. KHUSHBOO versus KANNIAMMAL AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B (2010) 5 S.C.R. 322 S. KHUSHBOO v. KANNIAMMAL AND ANR. (Criminal Appeal No. 913 of 2010) APRIL 28, 2010 [K.G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJI., DEEPAK VERMA AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: ss.292, 499, 500, 505, 509 - C Defamation, obscenity, indecent representation of women and incitement - Survey conducted by news magazine on the subject of sexual habits of people residing in bigger cities of India - Magazine gathered and published views expressed by several individuals as a/so of appellant - Appellant D expressed her opinion regarding the increasing incidence of pre-marital sex especially in the context of live~in relationship and need for its societal acceptance - Numerous criminal complaints filed in several places against the appellant under /PC and Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, E 1986 alleging that the appellant's remarks amounted to defamation, obscenity, indecent representatjon of women and would have effect of misguiding young people by encouraging them to indulge in premarital sex - High Court refusing to quash the proceedings but transferring them to one F place - On appeal, held: The criminal complaints1 not maintainable - Mere reference to sex cannot be considered obscene, thus s.292 /PC not applicable -At no point of time, appellant said anything that could arouse sexual desires in the mind of a reasonable and prudent person - There was neither any intent on part of the appellant to cause harm to G the reputation of the complainants nor 'any actual harm .done to their reputation· - Her statement was a rather general endorsement of pre-marital sex and her remarks were not directed at any individual or even at a 'company or an H 322 S. KHUSHBOO v. KANNIAMMAL AND ANR. 323 association or collection of persons' - Thus, the appellant's A views cannot be construed as an attack on the reputation of anyone in parlicular - Offence of defamation not made out - s. 509 /PC a/so not applicable as complainants' grievance was with the publication of what the appellant had stated in a written form and not by spoken words, gesture or physical act - s Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 - ss. 4 and 6 - Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 - s. 482 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Arl. 19(1)(a). Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.199- Prosecution for defamation - Appellant's statement published in news C magazine regarding the increasing incidence of pre-marital sex especially in the context of live-in relationship - Complaint of defamation by persons associated with a political parly active in the State of Tamil Nadu alleging that the remarks of appellant caused mental harassment to large D section of women - Maintainability of - Held: Not maintainable - In respect of the offence of defamation, s. 199 mandates that the Magistrate can take cognizance of the offence only upon receiving a complaint by a person who is aggrieved - Complainants cannot be properly described as E 'persons aggrieved' within th~ meaning of s.199(1)(b) - There was no specific legal injury caused to any of the complainants since the appellant's remarks were not directed at any individual or a readily identifiable group of people - Penal Code, 1860 - s.499. F Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986: ss.4 and 6 - Applicability of the Act - Appellant's statement published in news magazine regarding the increasing incidence of pre-marital sex especially in the G context of live-in relationship and need for its societal acceptance - Complaint under the Act against appellant alleging commission of offence of obscenity, indecent representation of women and incitement- Held: The 1986 Act was enacted to punish publishers and advertisers who H 324 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 5 S.C.R. A knowingly disseminate materials that portray women in an indecent manner - Not applicable to the appellant as she can neither be described as an "advertiser' nor 'publisher' by any means - Penal Code, 1860 - s.499. B Administration of criminal justice.: When the criminal law machinery is set in motion, the superior courts should not mechanically use either their inherent powers or writ jurisdiction to intervene with the process of investigation and trial - However, such forms of judicial review can be exercised to prevent a miscarriage of justice or to correct -some grave C · errors that might have been committed by the subordinate
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.