Earlier this week, the Supreme Court overturned a Delhi High Court verdict that upheld criminal proceedings against The Viral Fever's (TVF's) popular web series College Romance over the use of swear words and profanity.
The bench of Justices AS Bopanna and PS Narasimha emphasised that the language and content used in the disputed episodes of the series do not amount to the publication and transmission of obscene or sexually explicit content. The apex court also added that labelling abusive language as a criminal offence would be "an infraction of free speech rights".
What did the petitioners argue? What was the Delhi High Court verdict – and what did the Supreme Court rule? The Quint explains.
'Wrong Standard for What's Obscene...': Why SC Quashed Case Against TVF Show
1. Petition Against 'College Romance'
In 2018, an FIR (first information copy) was filed against Episode 5 of Season 1 of TVF's College Romance, titled 'Happily F****ed Up,' for allegedly using 'obscene' and 'vulgar' language and portraying women in 'indecent form'.
The complainant had claimed that the show allegedly violates Sections 292 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 67 (publishing or transmission of obscene material in electronic form) and 67A (publishing or transmission of material with a sexually explicit act in electronic form) of the Information and Technology Act, 2000, and Sections 2(c), 3 and 4 of the Indecent Representation of Women Prohibition Act, 1986.
The series continued to stream on various platforms, including YouTube and SonyLiv.
Expand2. Delhi High Court 2023 Verdict
The Delhi High Court in March 2023 had refused to quash the FIR against the creators of College Romance, citing explicit material and violating public decency standards.
According to a report by The Hindustan Times, the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (North), Rohini District Court, New Delhi, had ordered the registration of an FIR under multiple sections against the director of the series Simarpreet Singh and actor Apoorva Arora, but the Additional Sessions Judge later limited it to Section 67A of the IT Act.
In order to assess whether the content was obscene, the court adopted the test of an ordinary person rather than a hypersensitive one, watching several episodes of the web series, including the episode in question.
The court later ruled that a web series containing profanity, vulgar language, and explicit acts could deprave and 'corrupt impressionable minds,' falling within the ambit of Section 67 of the IT Act.
The court also held that the language used exceeded the threshold of decency and could be viewed by young people under 18 years, attracting Section 67A of the IT Act. It also emphasised that promoting such language as the spoken language of India and its youth remained unacceptable under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.
Certain episodes depicted explicit language and acts that aroused 'prurient feelings,' justifying their prohibition under Section 67/67A of the IT Act, the court ruled.
The court concluded that the online series failed to meet the test of public decency and affirmed the judge's ruling, emphasising the significance of upholding linguistic standards and following IT rules.
Expand3. What the Supreme Court Observed
The matter reached the Supreme Court when an appeal was filed by TVF against the March 2023 Delhi High Court order that directed the Delhi Police to register an FIR against the show's director and actors under Sections 67 and 67A of the IT Act.
Now the Supreme Court, quashing all criminal proceedings against College Romance, observed, “Such an approach unduly curtails the freedom of expression that can be exercised and compels the maker of the content to meet the requirements of judicial propriety, formality, and official language," as quoted by The Hindustan Times.
The court also criticised the High Court for not being objective in its analysis, as it took the meaning of language in its literal sense outside the context of the content. The court also noted that the High Court's observations were based on irrelevant considerations such as linguistic purity, civility, and morality.
The court further criticised the court for applying the wrong standard for determining obscenity, stating that the standard cannot be an "adolescent's or child's mind, or a hypersensitive person who is susceptible to such influences." It also emphasised that the availability of such content cannot be regulated by criminalising it as obscene, as it violates freedom of speech, expression, and artistic creativity.
Lastly, the court concluded that Section 67A cannot be applied in this case, as there is no allegation of any sexually explicit act or conduct in the complaint. The court added that sexually explicit acts or conduct may not be lascivious or appeal to prurient interests, but may have the opposite effect in artistic or devotional forms.
Expand4. How Celebrities Reacted to SC's Verdict
The Supreme Court's verdict was a welcome move for artists, at a time when popular web series such as Mirzapur, Paatal Lok, Chamak, Rana Naidu, She, Saas Bahu Aur Flamingo, and Delhi Crime continue to grab eyeballs for their 'civil' language.
Reacting to the Supreme Court's order, Gangs of Wasseypur actor Zeishan Quadri told The Tribune,
"Even if we are using the language, it has to be authentic. We can't lose balance. Sometimes makers and actors overdo abusive words, and that's misuse. At the same time, it's such a relief to know that someone out there understands that stopping someone to express themselves is a matter of violation of free speech rights.”
Actor Abhishek Banerjee also hailed the verdict, and told The Tribune, "I feel using abusive language is common in most parts of India; sometimes it’s meant as a friendly banter, and for some it’s a way to let go of their anger. As long as it’s relevant to the world, a filmmaker will keep showing it in cinemas. There shouldn't be a problem with using profanity or expletives. We can’t control art in the name of a few public opinions."
Writer-director Anuradha Tewari expressed her faith in the Supreme Court's efforts to protect freedom of speech and creative expression, stating that it is impossible to control art in the name of a few public opinions.
"I have the highest regard for the law and order machinery of our country and great faith in the SC’s endeavour to protect our freedom of speech and creative expression," she told the newspaper.
(With inputs from Hindustan Times, The Wire, and The Tribune)
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)
Expand
Petition Against 'College Romance'
In 2018, an FIR (first information copy) was filed against Episode 5 of Season 1 of TVF's College Romance, titled 'Happily F****ed Up,' for allegedly using 'obscene' and 'vulgar' language and portraying women in 'indecent form'.
The complainant had claimed that the show allegedly violates Sections 292 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 67 (publishing or transmission of obscene material in electronic form) and 67A (publishing or transmission of material with a sexually explicit act in electronic form) of the Information and Technology Act, 2000, and Sections 2(c), 3 and 4 of the Indecent Representation of Women Prohibition Act, 1986.
The series continued to stream on various platforms, including YouTube and SonyLiv.
Delhi High Court 2023 Verdict
The Delhi High Court in March 2023 had refused to quash the FIR against the creators of College Romance, citing explicit material and violating public decency standards.
According to a report by The Hindustan Times, the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (North), Rohini District Court, New Delhi, had ordered the registration of an FIR under multiple sections against the director of the series Simarpreet Singh and actor Apoorva Arora, but the Additional Sessions Judge later limited it to Section 67A of the IT Act.
In order to assess whether the content was obscene, the court adopted the test of an ordinary person rather than a hypersensitive one, watching several episodes of the web series, including the episode in question.
The court later ruled that a web series containing profanity, vulgar language, and explicit acts could deprave and 'corrupt impressionable minds,' falling within the ambit of Section 67 of the IT Act.
The court also held that the language used exceeded the threshold of decency and could be viewed by young people under 18 years, attracting Section 67A of the IT Act. It also emphasised that promoting such language as the spoken language of India and its youth remained unacceptable under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.
Certain episodes depicted explicit language and acts that aroused 'prurient feelings,' justifying their prohibition under Section 67/67A of the IT Act, the court ruled.
The court concluded that the online series failed to meet the test of public decency and affirmed the judge's ruling, emphasising the significance of upholding linguistic standards and following IT rules.
What the Supreme Court Observed
The matter reached the Supreme Court when an appeal was filed by TVF against the March 2023 Delhi High Court order that directed the Delhi Police to register an FIR against the show's director and actors under Sections 67 and 67A of the IT Act.
Now the Supreme Court, quashing all criminal proceedings against College Romance, observed, “Such an approach unduly curtails the freedom of expression that can be exercised and compels the maker of the content to meet the requirements of judicial propriety, formality, and official language," as quoted by The Hindustan Times.
The court also criticised the High Court for not being objective in its analysis, as it took the meaning of language in its literal sense outside the context of the content. The court also noted that the High Court's observations were based on irrelevant considerations such as linguistic purity, civility, and morality.
The court further criticised the court for applying the wrong standard for determining obscenity, stating that the standard cannot be an "adolescent's or child's mind, or a hypersensitive person who is susceptible to such influences." It also emphasised that the availability of such content cannot be regulated by criminalising it as obscene, as it violates freedom of speech, expression, and artistic creativity.
Lastly, the court concluded that Section 67A cannot be applied in this case, as there is no allegation of any sexually explicit act or conduct in the complaint. The court added that sexually explicit acts or conduct may not be lascivious or appeal to prurient interests, but may have the opposite effect in artistic or devotional forms.
How Celebrities Reacted to SC's Verdict
The Supreme Court's verdict was a welcome move for artists, at a time when popular web series such as Mirzapur, Paatal Lok, Chamak, Rana Naidu, She, Saas Bahu Aur Flamingo, and Delhi Crime continue to grab eyeballs for their 'civil' language.
Reacting to the Supreme Court's order, Gangs of Wasseypur actor Zeishan Quadri told The Tribune,
"Even if we are using the language, it has to be authentic. We can't lose balance. Sometimes makers and actors overdo abusive words, and that's misuse. At the same time, it's such a relief to know that someone out there understands that stopping someone to express themselves is a matter of violation of free speech rights.”
Actor Abhishek Banerjee also hailed the verdict, and told The Tribune, "I feel using abusive language is common in most parts of India; sometimes it’s meant as a friendly banter, and for some it’s a way to let go of their anger. As long as it’s relevant to the world, a filmmaker will keep showing it in cinemas. There shouldn't be a problem with using profanity or expletives. We can’t control art in the name of a few public opinions."
Writer-director Anuradha Tewari expressed her faith in the Supreme Court's efforts to protect freedom of speech and creative expression, stating that it is impossible to control art in the name of a few public opinions.
"I have the highest regard for the law and order machinery of our country and great faith in the SC’s endeavour to protect our freedom of speech and creative expression," she told the newspaper.
(With inputs from Hindustan Times, The Wire, and The Tribune)
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)