J U D G M E N T

Index to the Judgment A. FACTUAL BACKDROP ...................................................... 3 B. SUBMISSIONS AT THE BAR ............................................ 8 C. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS............................................. 10 I. Legal Framework ................................................................... 11 II. Community Standard Test .................................................... 15 III. Freedom of Speech vs. Public Decency and Morality ......... 20 IV. Linguistic Morality, Obscenity and Vulgarity ..................... 27 V. Morality and Legality: Role of Courts .................................. 31 D. CONCLUSION .................................................................... 39 SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

1. The instant petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) have been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 10.11.2020 passed in Criminal Revision No. 260/2019 titled “TVF Media Labs Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. vs. State & Ors.” by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohini District Court, New Delhi, (hereinafter ‘ASJ’) and order dated 17.09.2019 passed in Criminal Complaint No. 1396/2019 titled “Arvind Kumar vs. TVF Media” by learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (North), Rohini District Court, New Delhi (hereinafter ‘ACMM’).

2. This judgment shall govern the disposal of CRL.M.C. 2214/2020, CRL.M.C. 2399/2020 & CRL.M.C. 2215/2020 arising out of common set of facts, contentions and prayer. The petitioner no.1 in CRL.M.C. 2214/2020 is TVF Media Labs Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter ‘TVF’) , a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and petitioner no. 2 and 3 are Directors and Shareholders of petitioner no. 1. Whereas, petitioner no. 1 in CRL.M.C. 2399/2020 is the female protagonist and petitioner no. 2 is male protagonist in the web series titled ‘College Romance’. The petitioner in CRL.M.C. 2215/2020 is the Casting Director of the said web series. Since the present petitions arise out of the same set of facts and contentions and the issue before this Court in all the petitions is also common, the same are being decided through this common judgment.

A. FACTUAL BACKDROP

3. The brief facts of the present case are that petitioner/TVF Media Ltd. is owner of web series titled ‘College Romance’ which is being broadcasted primarily on various internet platforms such as YouTube, TVF Web Portal and Mobile Applications.

4. It is the alleged case of complainant that the said web series contains vulgar and obscene material and depicts women in indecent form in violation of the provisions of Sections 292/294 of Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’), 1860, Section 67/67A of Information and Technology Act, 2000 (‘IT Act’) and Sections 2 (c), 3 and 4 of Indecent Representation of Women Prohibition Act, 1986. It is the case of the complainant that petitioner is also the owner-cum- manager of popular YouTube channel known as ‘Timeliners’, on which indecent content had been broadcasted and published for consumption by general public without any warning to the effect that the content is for adult consumption only.

5. It is alleged in the complaint filed by respondent no. 2 i.e. Arvind Singh that accused no. 2 and 3 are the shareholders and directors of petitioner company whereas accused no. 4 is the casting director of the Web Series in question titled ‘College Romance’ through which obscene content is being circulated on various Internet portals and the accused no. 5 and 6 are the actress and actor respectively who had played the character of female lead and male protagonist in the objectionable web series whereas the accused no. 7 and 8 are two script writers of the obscene web series.

6. It is alleged that TVF owns one of the YouTube entertainment channels popularly known as ‘The Timeliners’ and that TVF under its entertainment channel ‘The Timeliners’ produces and broadcasts/publishes different webseries and shoots entertainment related videos and then