Jameel Ahmd v. State of Chhattisgarh

Jameel Ahmd v. State of Chhattisgarh
In the High Court of Chhattisgarh
CRA 1165/2002
Before Justice D.K. Tiwari
Decided on August 12, 2022

Relevancy of the Case: Validity of conviction under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, for owning cassettes containing obscene films

Statutes and Provisions Involved

Relevant Facts of the Case

The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 292 and 293 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Based on the seized evidence, the prosecution proved that the appellant owned cassettes containing obscene blue films.
The police filed the FIR after receiving secret information. This information said that the appellant took obscene photos of local girls and women.
During the investigation, the police seized a video camera, VCD, and video cassettes from the appellant’s house and shop.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

The appellant’s counsel argued that the trial court erred in charging the appellant under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Per Sharat Babu Digumarti v. Government (NCT of Delhi), he emphasised that the Information Technology Act, 2000 has an overriding effect. Furthermore, the counsel submitted that there is insufficient evidence to charge under Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The state’s counsel submitted that the trial court did not err in its judgment. The court had rightly convicted the appellant under the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Opinion of the Court

There is no evidence of the appellant committing the offences under the provisions mentioned above of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Per the Sharat Babu case, the Information Technology Act, 2000 has an overriding effect. Once the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 apply, the offender should get out of the charges against him under the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Therefore, the trial court wrongly convicted the appellant.

Final Decision

Technology. Law. Policy. You