Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4
PETITIONER:
UTTAM SINGH
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
THE STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)
DATE OF JUDGMENT21/03/1974
BENCH:
GOSWAMI, P.K.
BENCH:
GOSWAMI, P.K.
SARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH
CITATION:
1974 AIR 1230 1974 SCR (3) 722
1974 SCC (4) 590
ACT:
Penal Code--S. 292--Sale of playing cards with luridly
obscene naked pictures--Sentence if severe--If could be
released under the Probation of offenders Act, 1958.
HEADNOTE:
The appellant was convicted under s. 292 I.P.C. and
sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and fine for selling a
packet of playing cards portraying on the reverse luridly
obscene naked pictures of men and women in pornographic
sexual postures. The conviction and sentence was affirmed
by the High Court.
It was contended that the sentence was very severe on the
ground that only one single offence had been established and
secondly that he might be released Linder the Probation of
Offenders Act, 1958.
Dismissing the appeal,
HELD :-(i) The appellant cannot be dealt with leniently in
this case. The amendment of section 292 I.P.C. by Act XXXVI
of 1969, apart from enlarging the scope of the exceptions.
enhanced the penalty. By the amendment the dichotomy of
penal treatment was introduced for dealing with the first
offenders and the subsequent offenders. Even in the case of
first conviction the accused shall be punished with
imprisonment. The intention of the legislature was,
therefore, made clear by the amendment of 1969 in dealing
with this type of offenders which corrupt the minds of
people to whom these objectionable things can easily reach.
The corrupting influence of these pictures is more likely to
be upon the younger generation who has got to be protected
from being an easy prey to these libidinous appeals upon
which this illicit trade is based. [724A-B]
(ii) The appellant cannot be released under s. 4 of the
Probation of Offenders Act having regard to the nature of
the offence and the potential danger of the appellant’s
activity in the nefarious trade affecting the morals of
society, particularly the young. These offences have got to
be treated on the same footing ,is the cases of food
adulterators. [724-G]
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4
JUDGMENT:
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 49 of
1974.
From the Judgment aid Order dated the 1st October, 1973 of
the Delhi High Court at New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 170
of 1972.
Gopal Singh and M. S. Gupta, for the appellant.
R. N. Sachthey, for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
GOSWAMI, J.- This appeal by special leave is limited only to
the question of sentence in a conviction of the accused-
appellant under section 292, Indian Penal Code. The accused
has a shop at Kishan Ganj, Delhi. It is no more in
controversy that on 1st February, 1972, the accused sold a
packet of playing cards portraying on the reverse luridly
obscene naked pictures of men and women in pornographic
sexual postures to P.W. 1. This sale was arranged by the
police Sub-Inspector (P.W. 4) on receipt of secret
information about the accused uttering these obscene
pictures. On getting a signal from the purchaser a raid was
made in the accused’s shop when two more packets of such
723
obscene cards were also recovered in addition to the packet
already sold to P.W. 1. The ten-rupee note, which was the
price of the said set of playing cards and which had been
earlier given-by the Sub-Inspector to P.W. 1, was also
recovered from the person of the accused.
At the trial the accused was convicted under section 292,
Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six months’ rigorous
imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default further
rigorous imprisonment for three months. The High Court
affirmed the conviction as well as the sentence. Hence this
appeal.
The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
sentence is very severe on the ground that only one single
sale has been established in this case and also only three
packets of cards were recovered from the accused. He
further submits that the accused is entitled to be released
on probation under section 4 of the probation of Offenders
Act, 1958.
Since obscenity of the playing cards recovered from the
accused is not challenged and for the matter of that the
conviction under section 292, I.P.C., it is necessary even
for the purpose of appreciating the submission on the ground
of sentence to read the definition of obscenity under that
section to keep in mind what is interdicted under the law-.
Section 292(1) reads as follows :-
292(1) :"For the purpose of sub-section (2), a
book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing,
painting, representation or figure or any
other object, shall be deemed to be ob
scene, if
it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient
interest or if its effect, or (where it
comprises two or more items) the effect of any
one of its items, is, if taken as a whole,
such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons
who are likely, having regard to all relevant
circumstances; to read, see or bear the matter
contained or embodied in it".
Sub-section (2) of section 292 is the penal provision which
runs as follows :-
292 (2) : "Whoever-
sells, lets to hire, distributes, publicly
exhibits or in any manner puts into
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4
circulation, or for purposes of sale, hire,
distribution, public exhibition or
circulation, makes, produces or has in his
possession any obscene book, pamphlet, paper,
drawing, painting, representation or figure or
any other obscene object whatsoever....
shall be punished on first conviction with
imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to two years. and with fine
which may extend to two thousand rupees, and,
in the event of a second or subsequent convic-
tion, with imprisonment of either description
for a term which may extent to five years, and
also with fine which may extend to five
thousand rupees".
724
There are certain Exceptions to this section with which we
are concerned. This section was amended by Act XXXVI of
1969 when apart from enlarging the scope of the exceptions,
the penalty was enhanced which was earlier up to three
months or with fine or with both. By the amendment a
dichotomy of penal treatment was introduced for dealing with
the first offenders and the subsequent offenders. In the
case of even a first conviction the accused shall be
punished with imprisonment of either description for a term
which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend
to two thousand rupees. The intention of the legislature
is, therefore, made clear by the amendment in 1969 in
dealing with this type of offences which corrupt the minds
of people to whom these objectionable things can easily
reach and it need riot be emphasised that the corrupting
influence of these pictures is more likely to be upon the
younger generation who has got to be protected from being
easy prey to these libidinous appeals upon which this
illicit trade is based. We are, therfore, not prepared to
accept the submission of the learned counsel to deal with
the accused leniently in this case.
With regard to the plea of the learned counsel on the score
of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, we may read
the section
Power to Court to release certain offenders on
probation of good conduct : 4(1) "When any
person is found guilty of having committed an
offence not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life and the Court by which
the person is found guilty is of opinion that,
having regard to the circumstances of the case
including the nature of the defence and the
character of the offender, it is expedient, to
release him on probation of good conduct,
then, notwithstanding anything contained in
any other law for the time being in force, the
Court may, instead of sentencing him at once
to any punishment, direct that he be released
on his entering into a bond, with or without
sureties, to appear and receive sentence when
called upon during such period, not exceeding
three years, as the Court may direct, and in
the meantime to keep the peace and be of good
behaviour".
*
The accused is married and is said to be 36 years of ago.
Having regard to the circumstances of the case and the
nature of the offence and the potential danger of the
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4
accused’s activity in this nefarious trade affecting the
morals of society particularly of the young, we are not
prepared to release him under section 4 of the Probation of
Offenders Act. These offences of corrupting the internal
fabric of the mind have got to be treated on the same
footing as the cases of food adulterators and we are not
prepared to show any leniency. The appeal is, therefore,
rejected. The accused shall surrender to his bail to serve
the sentence.
P. B. R. Appeal dismissed.
725