Father-in-law kills son-in-law in Palamu’s ChhatarpurJharkhand governor applauds Ekal Abhiyan’s rural education, social awareness effortsरांची DC ने GAIL ठेकेदारों को सड़कें काम के बाद मूल स्वरूप में बहाल करने का दिया निर्देशRanchi DC tells GAIL contractors to restore roads after work1. Jharkhand finance minister seeks restoration of mining cess powers at Delhi meet 2. Centre notifies appointment of 14 judges, including three to Jharkhand High CourtBabulal Marandi questions changing government affidavits in JSSC-CGL case, seeks CBI probeJSSC-CGL मामले में बदलते हलफनामों पर बाबूलाल मरांडी के सवाल, CBI जांच की मांगKhunti DLSA holds MACT workshop to ensure timely accident compensation

Calling someone ‘Bas**rd’ not obscenity under IPC Section 294: Supreme Court

  New Delhi, April 6: The Supreme Court has held that merely using abusive or vulgar language, without any sexual or prurient…

Calling someone ‘Bas**rd’ not obscenity under IPC Section 294: Supreme Court

 

New Delhi, April 6: The Supreme Court has held that merely using abusive or vulgar language, without any sexual or prurient element, does not constitute an offence of obscenity under Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

A bench of Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra observed while setting aside the conviction of two persons accused of using the word “bastard” during a heated dispute over family property.

No Sexual Element, No Obscenity

The court noted that the use of such words, by itself, is not enough to arouse “prurient interest,” which is a key requirement to establish obscenity under the law.

Stay informed. Get Jharkhand's top stories in your inbox.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

ALSO READ: SC asks Nandalal Bose’s grandson to move tribunal after voter roll deletion in Bengal

“…mere use of the word ‘bastard’, by itself, is not sufficient to arouse prurient interest… such words are commonly used in the modern era during heated conversations,” the bench observed.

Advertisement
Advertisement

It added that the conviction under Section 294(b) IPC was not sustainable and therefore set it aside.

Reiterates Earlier Judgment

The court relied on its earlier ruling in Apoorva Arora vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), where it clarified that obscenity relates to content that arouses sexual or lustful thoughts.

Reaffirming this position, the bench observed that vulgarity or profanity alone does not amount to obscenity.

Advertisement
Advertisement

“While such language may be distasteful, uncivil, or improper, that by itself is not sufficient to be termed obscene,” the court said.

The ruling provides clarity on the legal distinction between offensive language and criminal obscenity under Indian law.

 

More from Breaking
Father-in-law kills son-in-law in Palamu’s Chhatarpur

Father-in-law kills son-in-law in Palamu’s Chhatarpur

September 20, 2026
Jharkhand governor applauds Ekal Abhiyan’s rural education, social awareness efforts

Jharkhand governor applauds Ekal Abhiyan’s rural education, social awareness efforts

September 20, 2026
रांची DC ने GAIL ठेकेदारों को सड़कें काम के बाद मूल स्वरूप में बहाल करने का दिया निर्देश

रांची DC ने GAIL ठेकेदारों को सड़कें काम के बाद मूल स्वरूप में बहाल करने का दिया निर्देश

September 19, 2026

Stay informed. Get Jharkhand's top stories in your inbox.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

About the Author

Suman Shrivastava