{"id":116369,"date":"2026-08-01T11:00:21","date_gmt":"2026-08-01T05:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/?p=116369"},"modified":"2026-08-01T11:00:21","modified_gmt":"2026-08-01T05:30:21","slug":"crude-language-and-the-law-obscenity-test-and-free-speech-in-india","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/crude-language-and-the-law-obscenity-test-and-free-speech-in-india\/","title":{"rendered":"Crude Language and the Law: Decoding the Noida FIR, Obscenity Test and Free Speech in India"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2><b>Crude Language and the Law Latest News<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Recently, Noida Police registered a Zero FIR against 25-year-old Ruchika Singh over remarks she allegedly made against PM Modi during a protest at Delhi&#8217;s Jantar Mantar on July 23.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The case, filed on a complaint by a Supreme Court advocate, has reignited debate on whether crude language against public figures constitutes a crime in India \u2014 and the legal answer is narrower than public sentiment suggests.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>The Case: Key Facts<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/what-is-zero-fir\/\" target=\"_blank\">Zero FIR<\/a> <\/strong>was filed at Expressway police station, Noida, on a complaint by advocate Smriti Singh, who found the language in a video of the incident objectionable.<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Zero FIR: An FIR that can be filed at any police station regardless of jurisdiction, later transferred to the station with actual jurisdiction.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It invokes Sections <\/span><b>352, 353(1), and 356(1)<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) \u2014 covering intentional insult, public mischief, and defamation respectively.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Since the alleged incident occurred in Delhi, the case has been transferred to Delhi Police for investigation.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Obscenity as a Legal Concept: How the Test Evolved<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The commonly invoked provision in such disputes \u2014 <\/span><b>Section 296<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">, BNS (Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code, or IPC) \u2014 punishes obscene acts or words in public &#8220;to the annoyance of others&#8221; with up to three months&#8217; jail.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Notably, this section was not invoked in the Noida case.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">1965 \u2014 <\/span><b><i>Ranjit D. Udeshi v State of Maharashtra<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: The SC banned Lady Chatterley&#8217;s Lover, adopting the Hicklin test (1868, English origin) \u2014 whether isolated passages could corrupt the &#8220;most vulnerable reader.&#8221;<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">2006 \u2014 <\/span><b><i>Doordarshan v Anand Patwardhan<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: SC cleared the broadcast of a censored documentary, ruling obscenity must be judged by viewing a work as a whole, through an average viewer&#8217;s eyes.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">2014 \u2014 <\/span><b><i>Aveek Sarkar v State of West Bengal<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: SC discarded the Hicklin test entirely, adopting a &#8220;<\/span><b>community standards&#8221; test<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (drawn from the US case Roth v United States, 1957) \u2014 material is obscene only if it tends to arouse sexual\/lustful feelings by contemporary community standards.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3><b>Criticism of 2014 Judgement\u00a0<\/b><\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Legal scholars contend that the original American test (Roth case) had three parts.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">For something to be called &#8220;obscene&#8221; in the US, it had to fail all three checks:<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It goes against community standards;<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It&#8217;s clearly and obviously offensive (not just borderline);<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It has no redeeming value \u2014 no artistic, literary, scientific, or social worth at all.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However, SC borrowed only the <\/span><b>first part<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> \u2014 &#8220;community standards&#8221; \u2014 and left out the other two safety checks.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">By dropping the other two parts, India&#8217;s test became much <\/span><b>looser and easier to misuse<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Something could now be called obscene just because it seems to go against &#8220;community standards&#8221; \u2014 even if it has genuine artistic or social value, and even if it&#8217;s not blatantly offensive.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Profanity Is Not Obscenity: Recent Rulings<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Supreme Court has repeatedly clarified that vulgar or abusive language, however distasteful, does <\/span><b>not<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> automatically amount to obscenity:<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>2024 \u2014 <\/b><b><i>College Romance case<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: SC quashed an IT Act case against the web series, holding that swear words reflect emotions like anger or frustration, not sexual intent.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>April 2026 \u2014 <\/b><b><i>Sivakumar v State<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: SC acquitted a man for calling someone &#8220;bastard&#8221; during an argument, holding it insufficient to constitute obscenity.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>July 2026 \u2014 <\/b><b><i>Mani v State<\/i><\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: SC reiterated, &#8220;obscenity is not synonymous with vulgarity, abuse or profanity.&#8221;<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>Legal test<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">: For speech to be obscene, it must be shown to be <\/span><b>lascivious<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> (expressing inappropriate sexual desire). Mere insult or vulgarity falls short of this threshold.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Why the Noida Case Involves a Different, Higher Bar<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The sections invoked against Ruchika Singh are unrelated to obscenity and each carry a stricter test:<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Section 352 (Insult):<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Requires proof the accused intended, or knew it was likely, that the insult would provoke an actual breach of public peace \u2014 not merely that someone felt offended.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Section 353(1) (Public Mischief):<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Aimed at incitement \u2014 such as mutiny, enmity between communities, or offences against the state \u2014 a considerably higher threshold than criticism of a leader.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Section 356(1) (Defamation):<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> Carries long-standing exceptions for good-faith comment on a public figure&#8217;s conduct in their public role.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2><b>Conclusion<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Indian courts have consistently narrowed the scope of &#8220;obscenity&#8221; from the archaic Hicklin test to a contemporary community-standards approach, while clarifying that mere vulgarity or insult does not meet this threshold.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">In the Noida case, the actual charges \u2014 insult, public mischief, and defamation \u2014 demand proof of intent to breach public peace or incite unrest, not just offensive language, placing the burden on investigators and courts to distinguish sharp political criticism from genuine criminal conduct.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><b>Source:<\/b> <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/explained\/explained-law\/fir-woman-pm-modi-comments-protests-10811876\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">IE<\/a> | <a href=\"https:\/\/timesofindia.indiatimes.com\/education\/news\/zero-fir-against-noida-woman-over-pm-modi-remarks-is-profanity-punishable-under-indian-law\/articleshowprint\/132765644.cms\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\">ToI<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Crude Language and the Law explains the Noida FIR, obscenity laws, BNS provisions, Supreme Court rulings, and the legal distinction between profanity and obscenity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":116404,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[9138,60,22,59],"class_list":["post-116369","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-upsc-mains-current-affairs","tag-crude-language-and-the-law","tag-mains-articles","tag-upsc-current-affairs","tag-upsc-mains-current-affairs-tag","no-featured-image-padding"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/116369","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=116369"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/116369\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":116386,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/116369\/revisions\/116386"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/116404"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=116369"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=116369"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=116369"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}