Question 6 (c): Cyber Obscenity
1. Meaning of Cyber Obscenity
Cyber obscenity refers to publishing, transmitting or sharing any sexually explicit, vulgar, offensive or indecent material through electronic devices, such as:
- Internet
- Social media
- Mobile apps
- Websites
It includes:
- Uploading obscene photos/videos
- Sending vulgar messages
- Circulating pornographic content
- Publishing child sexual abuse material
Cyber obscenity harms:
- Public morality
- Decency standards
- Dignity of individuals
- Mental well-being of women and children
2. Legal Provisions Under the Information Technology Act, 2000
(a) Section 67 — Publishing or transmitting obscene material
Punishes anyone who publishes or shares obscene content online.
Punishment:
- First offence → up to 3 years + fine up to ₹5 lakh
- Subsequent offence → up to 5 years + fine up to ₹10 lakh
(b) Section 67A — Sexually explicit acts
Focuses on stronger sexual content, including nudity or intercourse.
Punishment:
- First offence → up to 5 years + ₹10 lakh fine
- Repeat → up to 7 years + ₹10 lakh fine
(c) Section 67B — Child sexual abuse material (CSAM)
Covers:
- Child pornography
- Downloading/sharing videos of minors
- Using children for sexual content
Punishment:
- Up to 5 years + ₹10 lakh fine (first)
- Up to 7 years + higher fine (subsequent)
3. Relevant Provisions Under IPC
Section 292 IPC
Defines “obscene” and punishes sale, distribution or publication of obscene materials.
Section 354D IPC (Stalking)
Sending repeated obscene messages to a woman = Cyber stalking.
Section 509 IPC
Sending obscene words/gestures insulting a woman’s modesty.
4. Important Case Laws on Cyber Obscenity
1. Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal (2014)
Supreme Court held that obscenity must be judged by “contemporary community standards.”
Only “lascivious, sexual, depraving” content becomes obscene.
This case widened understanding of what is allowed vs what becomes punishable.
2. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)
Although mainly about Sec 66A, the Court clarified that obscenity is a reasonable restriction under Article 19(2).
This case strengthened the legal clarity around online obscene content and freedom of speech limits.
3. Ajay Goswami v. Union of India (2007)
Court held that government must protect children from harmful and obscene online content.
Also emphasized self-regulation of digital media.
4. Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (1965)
Landmark test for obscenity:
If content tends to deprave and corrupt the mind of the viewer → it is obscene.
Still used in cyber-obscenity cases.
5. Kamlesh Vaswani v. Union of India (2016)
Petition seeking complete ban on pornography.
Supreme Court directed the government to:
- Block child pornography sites
- Monitor obscene content
But allowed private adult viewing, recognizing personal liberty.
5. Cyber Obscenity and Women’s Protection Laws
- Section 354A (sexual harassment) covers sending sexually coloured messages.
- Section 67 & 67A IT Act apply when images/videos of women are shared without consent.
- POCSO Act applies if the victim is a minor.
6. Challenges in Controlling Cyber Obscenity
- Easy availability of smartphones
- Anonymous sharing
- Difficulty in tracing offenders
- Dark web and encrypted platforms
- Cross-border transmission of obscene content
7. Conclusion (Exam-Ready)
Cyber obscenity is a serious digital-age offence affecting dignity, morality, and safety—especially for women and children. The IT Act (Sections 67, 67A, 67B), IPC, and POCSO provide strong legal protection. Courts have clarified the meaning of obscenity through landmark cases like Aveek Sarkar, Ranjit Udeshi, and Kamlesh Vaswani.
Effective enforcement, public awareness, and technological monitoring are essential to control cyber obscenity.
Comments
Post a Comment