SHARAT BABU DIGUMARTI versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

Citation: [2016] 8 S.C.R. 1015 · Decided: 14-12-2016 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 6 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2016] 8 S.C.R. 1015 
SHARAT BABU DIGUMARTI 
v. 
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI 
(Criminal Appeal No. 1222 of 2016) 
DECEMBER 14, 2016 
[DIPAK MISRA AND PRAFFULA C. PANT, JJ,] 
A 
B 
Penal Code, 1860: s.292 - Offence relating to obscene 
material in electronic form - Proceedings uls.67 of IT Act dropped 
against appellant, but proceedings uls.292 not dropped - High c 
Court declined to interfere on the ground that there was sufficient 
material showing appellant :S- involvement to proceed against him 
for commission of offence punishable u/s.292 - Whether appellant 
who has been discharged uls. 67 of IT Act could be proceeded ul 
s.292 - Held: Obscenity pertaining to electronic record falls under 
the scheme of IT Act - IT Act is a special law - Special law shall D 
prevail over the general law - Therefore, the special provisions 
having overriding effect cover a criminal act and the offender, and 
the appellant in the instant case would get out of the net of s.292 -
Criminal proceedings lodged against appellant quashed - Obscene 
Books and Pictures Act, 1856 - Obscene Publications Act, 1925 -
E 
Informatfon Technology Act, 2000 - ss.2(1)(t), 67A, 678, 69, 79, 
81. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. The material on record show that the alleged 
possession of material constitutes the electronic record as defined 
F 
under Section 2(l)(t) of the IT Act. Section 67 A stipulates 
punishment for publishing or transmitting of material containing 
sexually explicit act, etc., in electronic form. Section 67B provides 
for punishment for publishing or transmitting of material depicting 
children in sexually explicit act, etc., in electronic form. Section 
69 provides for power to issue directions for interception or G 
monitoring or decryption of any information through any computer 
resource. It also carries a penal facet inasmuch as it states that 
the subscriber or intermediary who fails to comply with the 
directions issued under sub-section (3) shall be punished with 
1015 
H 
1016 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2016] 8 S.C.R. 
A imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and 
shall also be liable to fine. Section 67 clearly stipulates punishment 
for publishing, transmitting obscene materials in electronic form. 
The said provision read with Section 67 A and 67B is a complete 
code relating to the offences that are covered under the IT Act. 
B 
Section 79 is an exemption provision conferring protection to 
the individuals. Section 81 also specifically provides that the 
provisions of the Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything 
inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time 
being in force. All provisions will have their play and significance, 
if the alleged offence pertains to offence of electronic record. IT 
C Act is a special enactment. It has special provisions. Section 
292 of the IPC makes offence sale of obscene .books, etc. but 
once the offence has a nexus or connection with the electronic 
record the protection and effect of Section 79 IT Act cannot be 
ignored and negated. It is a special provision for a specific purpose 
D and. the Act has to be given effect to so as to make the protection 
effective and true to the legislative intent. This is the mandate 
behind Section 81 of the IT Act. The additional protection granted 
by the IT Act would apply. [Paras 18, 24, 25, 28)(1027-D; 1031-
A-B; 1032-C-D; 1034-F-H; 1036-A-B] 
E-
F 
Aneeta Hada v. Godfather Travels and Tours (P) Ltd. 
(2008) 13 SCC 703; Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of 
Maharashtra AIR 1965 SC 881: 1965 SCR 65; Shreya 
Singhal v. Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1 : 2015 (5) 
SCR 963 - relied on. 
2. Once the special provisions having the overriding effect 
cover a criminal act and the offender, he gets out of the net of the 
IPC and in this case, Section 292. Electronic forms of 
transmission is covered by the IT Act, which is a special law. It 
is settled position in law that a special law shall prevail over the 
general and prior laws. When the Act in various provisions deals 
G with obscenity in electronic form, it covers the offence under 
Section 292 IPC. The High Court has fallen into error that though 
charge has not been made out under Section 67 of the IT Act, yet 
the appellant could be proceeded under Section 292 IPC. [Paras 
32, 34)(1037-F-G; 1038-F-G] 
H 
Solidaire India Ltd. v. Fairgrowth Financial Services 
SHARAT BABU DIGUMARTI v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI 
Ltd. (2001) 3 SCC 71:2001 (1) SCR 932; Jeewan 
Kumar Raut

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.