Top News

The Supreme Court has ruled that the use of swear words, profanities or vulgar expletives, however offensive or uncivil they may be, does not automatically constitute the offence of obscenity under Indian law.

A Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and Vipul M. Pancholi made the observation while hearing an appeal challenging a Madras High Court judgment that had upheld a man's conviction under Section 294(b) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with obscene acts and words in public places. 'Obscenity Is Not the Same as Vulgarity'

The apex court drew a clear distinction between obscenity and vulgar or abusive language, stating that the two cannot be treated as interchangeable in law.

"Obscenity is not synonymous with vulgarity, abuse or profanity," the Bench observed, adding that while offensive language may be distasteful or shocking, it does not become legally obscene merely because it contains swear words.

The court explained that for speech to qualify as obscenity under Section 294(b) IPC, it must be lascivious, appeal to prurient interests, or have the tendency to deprave or corrupt those exposed to it. In addition, the prosecution must prove that the alleged conduct caused annoyance to others in a public place, which is an essential requirement of the offence.

The case arose from an agricultural land dispute in Tamil Nadu in August 2017 involving the appellant and his brother-in-law.

According to the prosecution, a second confrontation took place two days later between the appellant and the complainant's nephew over the same property issue. When the complainant intervened, the appellant allegedly used abusive language and also made caste-based remarks.

The trial court convicted the accused under Section 294(b) (obscenity), Section 326 (grievous hurt) and Section 506(ii) (criminal intimidation) of the IPC, along with provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Later, the Madras High Court acquitted him of the charges under the SC/ST Act but upheld the convictions under the IPC.

Examining the allegations, the Supreme Court held that even if the prosecution's version of events was accepted, the language allegedly used by the appellant was abusive and vulgar, but did not meet the legal threshold for obscenity under Section 294(b).

The bench said, “In the present case, during altercation, the appellant allegedly uttered that “Hey Motherfucker! You son of a whore! Are you coming in support of your elder sister's son? Just fuck off, you ‘Kurutha’ Fucker.." Such words, howsoever abusive, unpalatable or uncivil, do not satisfy the requirement of Section 294(b) IPC… Further, it is nobody’s case that use of such words caused annoyance to others in a public place, which is a mandatory ingredient of the Section. In the absence thereof, we find that the offence under Section 294(b) IPC is not made out."