SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1979 Supreme(SC) 525

R.S.PATHAK, V.R.KRISHNA IYER
Raj Kapoor – Appellant
Versus
Laxman – Respondent


Advocates:
K.HINGORANI

JUDGMENT

KRISHNA IYER, J.— Sublime titles of cinematograph films may enchant or entice and only after entry into the theatre the intrinsic worth of the picture because-the picture dawns on the viewer. The experience may transfer because the picture is great or the audiencee may lose lucre and culture in the bargain. Mere titles may not, therefore, attest the noxious or noble content of the film. Sometimes the same film may produce contrary impacts and what one regards as lecherous another man may consider elevating. Be that as it may, a well publicised film Satyam, Sivam, Sundaram became the subject-matter of a prosecution, presumably a pro bona publico proceeding, by the respondent against the petitioner and other who are the producer, actor, photographer, exhibitor and distributor of that film. The complaint alleged that the fascinating title was misleading, foul and beguiled the guileless into degeneracy. If the gravament of this accusation were true, obscenity, indecency and vice are writ large on the picture, constituting an offence under S.292 I.P.C. The Magistrate, after examining some witnesses, took cognisance of the offence and issued notice to the accused. Thereupon, the





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top