Supreme Court Upholds Conviction as Husband Failed to Explain Wife’s Death in Matrimonial Home  ||  Supreme Court: Crime Scene Re-Enactment Does Not Always Violate Right Against Self-Incrimination  ||  Supreme Court: Cognizance Taken Without Hearing Accused under BNSS Section 223 is Void Ab Initio  ||  Supreme Court Upholds Will in Sister’s Favour, Says Excluding Natural Heirs is Not Suspicious  ||  Delhi HC: Absence of Public Witnesses and Videography in NDPS Recovery Relevant for Bail Decisions  ||  Raj HC Initiates Suo Motu Cognizance Over Severe Water Crisis in Jodhpur, Issues Interim Directions  ||  Del HC: Courts Cannot Direct, Monitor Inquiry Into Police Delay in Investigation After Bail Decision  ||  Supreme Court: After the BNSS, a Pre-Cognizance Hearing is Mandatory in PMLA Cases  ||  SC: Landowners Cannot be Forced to Waive Statutory Compensation to Claim Other Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Banks are Lenient With Big Borrowers But Strict With Ordinary Loan Applicants    

Supreme Court: Calling Someone ‘Bastard’ In Heated Exchange Isn’t Obscenity under IPC Section 294 - (07 Apr 2026)

CRIMINAL

Supreme Court held that merely using abusive words like “bastard” in a heated argument does not constitute obscenity under Section 294 IPC, clarifying that the offence requires a sexual or prurient element, and mere verbal abuse is insufficient.

Tags : BASTARD   OBSCENITY   HEATED EXCHANGE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved