The Court clarified the application of obscenity in verbal abuse under IPC and upheld charges of criminal trespass.

ORDER

The accused in C.C No.98/2017 on the files of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Hosdurg has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the proceedings against him in the aforesaid case.

2. The prosecution case is that on 16.11.2016 at about 8:00 p.m, the petitioner criminally trespassed into the Courtyard of the house of the de facto complainant, and uttered abusive words, and thereby committed the offence punishable under Sections 447 and 294(b) I.P.C. The case has been registered by the Rajapuram Police on 17.11.2016 on the basis of the first information statement given by the de facto complainant. After the completion of the investigation, the S.I of Police, Rajapuram laid the final report against the petitioner alleging the commission of the aforesaid offences.

3. In the present petition, the petitioner would contend that he is totally innocent and that a false case has been foisted against him. It is further contended that the offence under Section 294 (b) I.P.C is not attracted even if the entire allegations of the de facto complainant are accepted as such. The petitioner would further state that a case has been registered against the husband of the de facto complainant and others under Sections 452, 323 and 326 r/w Section 34 I.P.C in connection with the criminal trespass into the residence of the petitioner, and physical assault committed by the husband of the de facto complainant and others at 8:30 p.m on 16.11.2016.

4. As per order dated 26.06.2025, this Court appointed Adv.Mr. Renjith B. Marar as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court for embarking upon a correct analysis of the scope of Section 294 (b) I.P.C.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Amicus Curiae and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

6. Section 294 (b) I.P.C has been incorporated in the final report on the basis of the statement of the de facto complainant that the petitioner verbally abused the de facto complainant and her husband, after criminally trespassing into the courtyard of their residence in an inebriated condition. However, the de facto complainant had not stated the words uttered by the petitioner during the course of the alleged verbal abuse. Instead, there is only a vague statement that the petitioner uttered bad words. Thus, it has to be stated that the offence under (b) I.P.C, cannot be said to be attracted, in the facts and circumstances of the case, since there is absolutely nothing on record to show that the petitioner recited or uttered any obscene words in or near any public place. The learned Amicus Curiae, by relying on a catena of Indian and foreign decisions, right from Regina v. Hicklin [1868 LR 3 QB 360] to Deepa v. State of Kerala [2024 KHC Online 1439], pointed out that the prevailing position of law as evolved from judicial precedence, is that mere abusive or defamatory words will not as such amount to obscenity as envisaged under law. It is further pointed out that, to proceed against an accused for the commission of offence under (b) I.P.C, the alleged words uttered must be in a sense lascivious or it must appeal to the prurient interest, or must be capable of depraving and corrupting persons. As far as the present case is concerned, the vague statement of the de facto complainant that the petitioner uttered bad words, is not sufficient to fasten him with criminal liability under (b) I.P.C.

7. As regards the offence of criminal trespass, it could be seen from the first information statement given by the de facto complainant as well as from the statement of CW2 that the petitioner criminally trespassed into the courtyard of the residence of the de facto complainant and verbally abused the de facto complainant and her husband. The aforesaid act of the petitioner entering into the property in possession of the de facto complainant with the intention to insult and annoy the de facto complainant and her husband by verbally abusing them, would def