Mere use of abusive language does not constitute offenses under sections 294 and 506 IPC without intent to cause alarm or annoyance and lack of evidence.

ADMIT. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel for both the parties.

2. By this application, the applicants are seeking quashing of the criminal proceeding bearing No.3127/2016 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2, Nagpur.

3. Brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of the application are as under:

A] Respondent No.2 who is the original complainant has lodged the First Information Report that on 21.06.2016 at around 7.45 p.m. respondent No.2 along with his mother gone to the Hanuman Mandir situated near RTO office, Giripeth, Nagpur wherein he was abused as well as threatened by the present applicants with a dire consequences. It is further alleged that he was abused in a filthy language. On the basis of the said report, police have registered the crime under Section 294 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code . After completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted the charge-sheet against the present applicant which is numbered as Regular Criminal Case No.3127/2016.

4. Learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that even taking the allegations as it is, no offence is made out as the test which is to be applied for the obscenity, if applied, by no stretch of imagination it can be said that the words used by the present applicants covers under the definition of obscenity. He submitted that even accepting the allegation as it is, no offence is made out as far as Section 294 of the IPC is concerned. He also submitted that as far as the allegation as to the threatening is concerned it is also a general allegation levelled against the present applicants and thus, there is no criminal intimidation to indicate that there was an act of threatening to the present respondent No.2. In view of that, the entire criminal proceeding deserves to be quashed.

5. In support of his contention, he placed reliance on N.S. Madhanagopal and anr. Vs. K. Lalitha [(2022) 15 S.C.R. 649] and Manik Taneja and anr. Vs. State of Karnataka and anr. [(2015) 1 S.C.R. 156] and submitted that as no offence is made out entire criminal proceeding deserves to be quashed.

6. Learned APP strongly opposed the application and submitted that the recitals of the FIR as well as the statements of the witnesses discloses the offence against the present applicants, and therefore, the application deserves to be rejected.

7. On going through the entire investigation papers wherein the allegation is that when the informant had been to the Maroti temple at that time the present applicants abused him in a filthy language and also threatened him. The test of obscenity under Section 294 (b) of the IPC is whether the tendency of the matter charged under the obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences. Section 294 (b) of the IPC talks about the obscene acts.

Section 294 of the IPC which is reproduced as under :

“294.Obscene acts and songs - Whoever, to the annoyance of others -

(a) does any obscene act in any public place, or (b) sings, recites or utters any obscene song, ballad or words, in or near any public place, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months, or with fine, or with both.”

8. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of N.S. Madhanagopal and anr. Vs. K. Lalitha (supra) wherein while considering the test of ‘obscenity’ under Section 294 (b) of the IPC observes as follows:

“……. the test of obscenity is this, whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences” This test has been uniformly followed in In