Back
1987 Supreme(Kar) 172
Karnataka High Court
C.Mani - Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka - Respondent
Decided On : 07-08-87
CRI.R.P. : 380 of 1985
M.S.Varadarajan, S.S.KOTI
The main legal point established is that the accused must be punished with both imprisonment and fine as per the amended law under Sec. 292 IPC.
Headnote:
Criminal Procedure - Conviction under Section 292 IPC - Sec. 397, 401 CrPC - [OBSCENE BOOKS] - [Sec. 292 IPC] - [Sec. 397, 401 CrPC] - The court discussed the legality of search and seizure proceedings, the definition of 'obscene' under Sec. 292 IPC, and the punishment for the offence. The accused was convicted for selling obscene books and sentenced to imprisonment and fine. The court upheld the conviction and modified the sentence to a fine only.
Fact of the Case:
The accused, a salesman at a book stall, was convicted of selling obscene books under Sec. 292 IPC. The prosecution alleged that the accused sold obscene books to a witness and seized more obscene books from the book stall. The accused denied the offence and claimed trial.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty based on the evidence of the witness and upheld the conviction. The court also modified the sentence to a fine only, considering the accused's family and the nature of the offence.
Issues: The issues included the legality of search and seizure proceedings, the definition of 'obscene' under Sec. 292 IPC, and the appropriate punishment for the offence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the search and seizure proceedings were legal, the seized books were obscene under Sec. 292 IPC, and the accused must be punished with both imprisonment and fine as per the amended law.
Final Decision: The court upheld the conviction, modified the sentence to a fine only, and disposed of the revision petition.
( 1 ) THIS is a revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 of the code of Criminal Procedure (the Code for short) and is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 17-3-1982, passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore in C. C. No. 609/1980 on his file, maintained and affiimed by the learned XI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore city in Criminal Appeal No. 62 of 1982.
( 2 ) UNDER the judgment of conviction and sentence challenged in this revision petition, C. Mani s/o. Chowriswamy-the petitioner has been convicted of the offence punishable under Section 292 ipc , and has been sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- with a direction to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one month in default of payment of fine.
( 3 ) THE petitioner who would hereinafter be referred to as the accused and one Suresh C. Shah were tried of the offence punishable under Sec. 292 IPC. on the allegation that on 17-7-1980, suresh C. Shah the proprietor of 'sapna book Stall', Gupta Market, Bangalore had kept many obscene books containing photographs of men and women in different sexual acts both natural and unnatural for sale, and that that the accused as a salesman in 'sapna Book Stall' ('the book stall' for short), used to sell such obscene books and on 17-7-1980 the accused sold two books marked as Exhibits P1 and P2 titled 'color Orgie' and 'party Love' respectively.
( 4 ) THE accused denied the offence charged and claimed trial.
( 5 ) THE prosecution examined at the trial 4 witnesses and depended upon 16 documents and 2 material objects in support of the charge.
( 6 ) THE accused during the course of his statutory examination while admitting that he was working as a salesman in the book stall owned by Suresh C. Shah, denied the prosecution case that he had sold Exhibits P1 and P2.
( 7 ) THE learned trial Magistrate on assessing the evidence reached the conclusion that the offence alleged against the accused had been brought home beyond reasonable doubt. In the view he took he convicted and sentenced the accused as aforesaid.
( 8 ) THE accused carried the matter in appeal to the Appellate Court. The learned XI Additional City Civil and Sessions judge heard the appeal and by the order made on 28-5-1985 dismissed it. The learned Additional Sessions Judge while dismissing the appeal made an independent assessment of the evidence let in by the prosecution.
( 9 ) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High court Government Pleader for the State. I have perused the record.
( 10 ) IT was urged on behalf of the petitioner, that the search and the seizure proceedings taken by P. W. 1 K. S. Raviraj without obtaining a search warrant, having been held in non-compliance with the provisions of law were illegal, that the prosecution launched on the basts of such illegal proceedings is vitiated, that there was no sale by the accused to P. W, 2 of Exhibits P1 and P2, that the sale was an arranged one. which would indicate even accepting the prosecution case in its entirety that it was an unvoluntary and forced sale, and that even if the prosecution case is accepted it would not take the case of the accused within the ambit and scope of Section 292 IPC. since Exts. P1 and P2 cannot be said by any stretch of imagination as books, containing obscene matters. It was also contended on behalf of the petitioner that the punishment meted out to the petitioner is unduly severe and disproportionate, that the owner of the book Stall has been acquitted and only the salesman is convicted and punished, that the trial Court has not taken into consideration this matter while exercising the discretion in the matter of punishment and that the Appellate Court has failed to examine whether the Trial Court had exercised the discretion in the proper manner.
( 11 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner urged very str
