<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (5) TMI 1137 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196059</link>
    <description>Obscenity under Section 292 IPC was assessed by applying contemporary community standards to the work as a whole from the standpoint of the average person, while recognising that freedom of speech is subject to decency and morality restrictions. The Court noted that when a historically respected figure is used as the symbolic voice in a poem, the obscenity inquiry may become more intense because context affects the words&#039; impact. On the material considered, the poem&#039;s use of Mahatma Gandhi was capable of attracting a prima facie charge, leaving the author&#039;s defence for trial. The charge was sustained against the author, but was quashed against the publisher, who apologised promptly, and the printer, who acted only on instructions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jul 2025 18:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=496623" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (5) TMI 1137 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196059</link>
      <description>Obscenity under Section 292 IPC was assessed by applying contemporary community standards to the work as a whole from the standpoint of the average person, while recognising that freedom of speech is subject to decency and morality restrictions. The Court noted that when a historically respected figure is used as the symbolic voice in a poem, the obscenity inquiry may become more intense because context affects the words&#039; impact. On the material considered, the poem&#039;s use of Mahatma Gandhi was capable of attracting a prima facie charge, leaving the author&#039;s defence for trial. The charge was sustained against the author, but was quashed against the publisher, who apologised promptly, and the printer, who acted only on instructions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196059</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>