HC: Mere Abuses Not Obscenity Under IPC 294

Nagpur: The Nagpur Bench of Bombay high court recently quashed a 2019 criminal case against a former Akola corporator, holding that "mere abuses are not sufficient to attract the offence punishable under Section 294 of IPC that penalises obscene acts and songs performed in public" and that the allegations of extortion were unsupported by evidence.Allowing a criminal application filed through counsel Raheel Mirza, justice Urmila Joshi Phalke set aside the FIR registered at Civil Lines Police Station, Akola. The case invoked Section 389 (Putting a person in fear of accusation to commit extortion), Section 384 (Punishment for extortion) and Section 385 (Putting a person in fear of injury in order to commit extortion), read with Section 34 of IPC, against the petitioner.
The FIR, lodged by a businessman, alleged that on April 25, 2019, the petitioner entered his ready-made garment shop, selected shirts without payment, abused staff, forcibly took 4,000,and threatened and assaulted employees.The petitioner contended that the complaint arose from political rivalry and pointed to medical records that did not substantiate claims of assault. The court noted that injury certificates did not reflect harm to those present."On perusal of the FIR, it reveals that the respondent alleged that he was abused by the petitioner, but the exact abuses are not narrated by him," the judge observed. Even if such allegations under Section 294 were accepted, the court said, "the test of obscenity is to be fulfilled."Citing the Supreme Court's rulings in NS Madhanagopal versus K Lalitha and Ranjit Udeshi versus State of Maharashtra, the Judge reiterated that obscenity requires a "substantial tendency to corrupt by arousing lustful desires" and the presence of "lascivious elements."On the extortion charges, the court found that the essential ingredients of Sections 384 and 385 were not met. "There is nothing on record to show that the respondent or any other employee of his shop were put under fear or any injuries were caused to them to hand over the said amount of extortion," the judge said."In view of the above observation… the offence under Section 294 of IPC is also not made out," the court held, quashing the FIR and all consequential proceedings.