Watching porn in private is a right to personal liberty: SC

In the current era of Fifty Shades of Grey, personal liberty just got smeared in a shade of ‘blue’. However, there will be no restriction, at least for now, on watching pornographic content within the four walls in India. Moral police may shudder at the decision, but the Hon’ble Supreme Court has flatly refuted to order the blocking of pornographic websites.

It was observed that personal liberty remains supreme in the land of Kamasutra. The ‘blue’ films on the internet, therefore, will not face the judicial axe, because eroticism is a personal choice. “Such interim orders cannot be passed by this court. Somebody can come to the court and say ‘Look, I am an adult and how can you stop me from watching it within the four walls of my room? It is a violation of Article 21 (right to personal liberty) of the Constitution.’ Yes the issue is serious and some steps need to be taken… the Centre has to take a stand… let us see what stand the Centre will take”, said Chief Justice of India HL Dattu. The CIJ, who was heading a three-judge Bench, asked the Union home ministry to file a detailed affidavit within four weeks. 

The remarks came when lawyer Vijay Panjwani — representing an Indore-based advocate, Kamlesh Vaswani the petitioner in a PIL seeking the blocking of all porn sites — pressed for an interim order till the home ministry took a stand on the issue. Panjwani argued that while the Ministry of Home Affairs failed to file an affidavit despite repeated directions, crime against women and children which is “majorly influenced” by such porn videos is on the rise.

However, the Supreme Court’s latest observation contradicts its earlier stance that such erotic content needs to be blocked. Another Supreme Court Bench, headed by the then Chief Justice RM Lodha, had agreed with the same PIL and during a hearing in August 2014 demanded strict laws to curb the online content. He had called for a coordinated effort between the Department of Telecommunication, Information and Broadcasting Ministry, and the Home Ministry to deal with the menace.

Panjwani argued that officials of these websites were punishable under section 292 of the Indian Penal Code (punishment for showing obscene materials) and section 13 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (use of children for pornographic purposes).

Lawyer Pavan Duggal said the Information Technology Act does not make it illegal to view adult porn, but watching child pornography is an offence under Section 67B of IT Act, added in 2008. “It is also an offence to cultivate, entice or induce children to an online relationship with other children for a sexual act,” he said and further added “It is a non-bailable offence with a maximum jail term of seven years and a fine of up to Rs 10 lakh. But the problem is that this law has never been invoked and there has not been any conviction till date.”