IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH (INDORE BENCH)
Shailendra Shukla, J.
Ekta Kapoor - Appellants
Vs.
State of M.P. and Ors. - Respondent
M.Cr.C. No. 28386/2020
Decided On : 11-11-2020
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. complaint about obscenity in web series. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. petitioner argues artistic expression against complaint. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. court observes case merits continued investigation. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 4. judicial guidelines on quashing fir. (Para 31 , 32 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 5. court dismisses petitioner’s request. (Para 111) |
ORDER :
Shailendra Shukla, J.
Heard the learned counsel through video conferencing.
1. This order seeks to dispose of the petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashment of FIR bearing Crime No. 02142020, registered at police station Anapurna, Indore (M.P.), under the provisions of Sections 294 , 298 and 34 of IPC, under Sections 67 and 67-A of I.T. Act and Section 3 of State Emblem Act .
2. Facts which are relevant for discussion in this matter are that the respondent No. 2 filed a complaint against the petitioner with regard to transmission of an episode in web series (XXX Uncensored) on Zee 5 which is being promoted by ALT Balaji, a concern owned by petitioner and her mother.
3. The web series contains different stories or episodes which the complainant has mentioned as obscene and vulgar to an extent that it calls for penal action. Of specific reference is an episode entitled as 'Pyar Aur Plastic' which is episode 1 of season 2.
4. The story revolves around 3 characters Dr. Sanjay who is a plastic surgeon, his girlfriend namely Priya and one another lady who is step mother of Priya. The step mother visits Dr. Sanjay for cosmetic treatments for her body transformation as a gift to her husband on his 60th birthday who is a retired Army Officer. During the course of interaction the step mother and Dr. Sanjay grow close to each other and become physically intimate with each other. On the other hand, Priya, the girlfriend of Dr. Sanjay decides to introduce him to her parents. When Dr. Sanjay meets Priya's parents, he is left dumb founded, as the step mother of Priya is the same lady who had earlier become intimate with Dr. Sanjay. However, Dr. Sanjay and Priya eventually get married. The step mother, however entices Dr. Sanjay to continue physical intimacy with her. This intimacy is discovered by Priya. Shocked Priya files divorce case against Dr. Sanjay and her step mother claims that it was Dr. Sanjay who was forcing himself on her. Priya claims Rs. 5.00 Crores along with life time of free Botox treatment from Sanjay as alimony.
5. The complainant submits that the sole purpose of making the episode is to titillate and arouse the baser instincts of audience, that such obscene depiction on public platform has caused annoyance, that it intentionally hurts religious feelings when the male protagonist expresses disgust on knowing about 'Satyanarayan Katha' in the house of his love interest and that a particular scene breaches the sanctity of National emblem amounting to its dishonour.
6. The petitioner submits that during the moments of physical intimacy of step mother of Priya with Dr. Sanjay, the step mother is shown to have made Dr. Sanjay wear her husband's uniform and later during the course of intimacy she unbuttons the said blazer. This scene has been objected against by the complainant saying that it tarnishes the reputation of Indian Army.
7. The petitioner in his petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., submits that the web series is about interpersonal relationship and different circumstances/situations arising therefrom. The petitioner submits that the web series is a drama/comedy/parody, which explores schemes of romance and human sexuality in different modern day scenario. The web series and episode are not remotely connected with Indian Army or religion.
8. The petitioner submits that he is a Managing Director of ALT Digital Media Entertainment Ltd., reg
Aveek Sarkar vs. State of West Bengal reported in AIR 2014 SC 1493 : (2014) 4 SCC 257
Sharat Babu Digumarti vs. Government of Delhi (NCT) (2017) 2 SCC 18
Ranjit D. Udeshi vs. State of Maharashtra reported in AIR 1965 SC 881
Aneeta Hada vs. Godfather Travels and Tours Private Limited reported in 2012(5) SCC 661
Ajay Goswami vs. Union of India
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
A valid signature must be in the candidate's own handwriting, as emphasized by the General Clauses Act and relevant case law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.