Supreme Court: Calling Someone ‘Bastard’ In Heated Exchange Isn’t Obscenity under IPC Section 294  ||  Supreme Court: Even a Single Tainted Public Work Award Violates Article 14  ||  Supreme Court Upholds Lease Cancellation, Denies Relief for Failure to Develop Allotted Land  ||  Supreme Court Quashes Medical Negligence Case, Says Surgeon Best Placed To Choose Procedure  ||  Supreme Court: Sajjadanashin of a Dargah and Mutawalli of a Waqf are Distinct Roles  ||  Supreme Court: Criminal Proceedings Can be Quashed if Reliable Evidence Disproves Allegations  ||  Delhi HC: Promises by CM at Press Conferences are Not Legally Enforceable Without Policy Support  ||  Allahabad HC: Challenges to Tribunal Orders Must be Filed in the HC With Territorial Jurisdiction  ||  Allahabad HC: Challenges to Tribunal Orders Must be Filed in the HC With Territorial Jurisdiction  ||  J&K&L HC: Historical Books Cannot Establish Private Property Titles under Section 57 Evidence Act    

Amardeep Singh Chudha v. State of Maharashtra - (High Court of Bombay) (10 Mar 2016)

Obscene acts in private place not a ‘public offence’

MANU/MH/0353/2016

Criminal

Obscene activities in private place not causing disturbance or disruption to others cannot be taken cognisance of by police under Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code. The court reiterated that Section 294, pertaining to ‘obscene acts and songs’, required the same be performed in a place meant for the public at large - which a locked apartment was not. Though it did not express opinion on the ongoing activity in the flat itself, scantily clad women dancing for a male audience, the court added that music in the flat was not alleged to have caused annoyance to neighbours. The FIR lodged against 13 men was quashed.

Relevant : State of Harayana and others V/s. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors. MANU/SC/0115/1992

Tags : OBSCENE ACT   PRIVATE PLACE   COGNISANCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved