HARI KRISHNA BHATT Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
LAWS(UTN)-2013-9-32
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on September 24,2013

Hari Krishna Bhatt Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Umesh Chandra Dhyani, J. - (1.) THE applicant, by means of present application/petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., seeks to quash the charge -sheet dated 03.05.2009, summoning order dated 11.06.2009 as well as the proceedings of criminal case No. 457 of 2009, State v. Hari Krishna Bhatt under Sections 292, 294 of IPC and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamoli.
(2.) MR . Nakli Singh, Station House Officer, police station Chamoli, District Chamoli lodged an FIR bearing case crime No. 23 of 2009, under Sections 292, 294 of IPC against the accused -applicant on 03.02.2009. After the investigation, a charge -sheet for the offences punishable under Section 292, 294 of IPC and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act was filed against two accused persons, including the applicant. Aggrieved against the submission of charge -sheet, present application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. was filed by the applicant namely, Hari Krishna Bhatt. According to FIR, an informer informed the Police Inspector, police station, Chamoli that accused Hari Krishna Bhatt has prepared a video clip of his intimate relationship with a woman. Police Inspector operated the said CD in computer and found that the picturisation contained obscene acts. When the Investigating Officer took the statement of Police Inspector, the Police Inspector said that the accused -applicant prepared the video clip, copies of which are available with many a persons. When Police Inspector inquired about the same from the accused -applicant, he said that he prepared the CD with his wife. Accused -applicant also said that somebody stole the CD from his computer and made the same available to others.
(3.) A bare perusal of the FIR, as also the statement of the Police Inspector, nowhere revealed that the accused -applicant published or transmitted or caused to be published or transmitted in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it. Even if it be presumed for the sake of argument that such CD was prepared by the accused -applicant, the fact remains that the same was never published or transmitted or caused to be published or transmitted to any person by the accused -applicant. At the most, the said CD was prepared by the accused -applicant with his wife, but never made the contents of the same public so as to attract the punishment under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. There is, therefore, no reason to cause annoyance to others so as to attract Section 294 of IPC either.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.