I. INTRODUCTION

The pornography business has targeted a new segment of viewers by targeting the juveniles and teenagers. The modus operandi is very simple. These pornographic materials are introduced in the form of cartoon porn movies and video games. Since the teenagers are used to of watching cartoon movies and playing video games, these types of pornographic promotions have found a place in India. This phenomenon has not only the tendency to eliminate the innocence of these teenagers but equally has a potential to affect the development of social skills among them. This happens because these teens are addicted to these “stuffs” and their innocence and social skills are jeoparadised.

II. LEGAL SAFEGUARDS

The artistic merit or their social value of a work may overshadow their offending character. A work of art is not necessarily obscene if it is dealing with sex or even with nudity and a work of art or a book of literary merit should not be destroyed if the interest of society requires that it be preserved. It should be viewed as a whole, and its artistic or literary merits should be weighed against the so-called obscenity, the context in which the obscenity occurs and the purpose it seeks to serve. If on a fair consideration’ of these opposite aspects the interest of society is not adversely affected then the work of art or the book must be preserved, for then the obscenity is overborne. If the work in question has no social value and its culpable part is socially, legally and morally undesirable, then the same will be dealt with stringent penal provisions. If a work is devoid of any artistic value and is obscene or pornographic in nature, the law will tackle it profoundly.

The traditional law dealing with obscenity is contained in section 292 of I.P.C. Section 293 of the Code provides for enhanced sentence where the obscene objects are sold, etc, to persons under the age of twenty years. By Act XXXVI of 1969 the punishment for the offence is further enhanced.

III. JUDICIAL RESPONSE

The judiciary in India has always considered obscenity a serious threat to the society at large and took it very seriously. At the same time it encouraged genuine works having artistic value where the objectionable contents of those works were considerably overshadowed by their intrinsic value to the society at large. In Ranjit .D. Udeshi v State of Maharashtra the appellant, a bookseller, sold a copy of the unexpurgated edition of "Lady Chatterley's Lover". He was convicted under section 292, Indian Penal Code. On an appeal the Supreme Court observed: “The section embodies a reasonable restriction upon the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by Art.19 and does not fall outside the limits of restriction permitted by clause (2) of the Article. The section seeks no more than the promotion of public decency and morality, which are the words of that clause. The book must be declared obscene within the meaning of section 292, Indian Penal Code. The word "obscene” in the section is not limited to writings, pictures etc. intended to arouse sexual desire. At the same time the mere treating with sex and nudity in art and literature is not per se evidence of obscenity. Though the work as a whole must be considered, the obscene matter must be considered by itself and separately to find out whether it is so gross and its obscenity so decided that it is likely to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to influences of this sort. In this connection the interests of contemporary society and particularly the influence of the impugned book on it must not be overlooked. The section does not make the bookseller's knowledge of obscenity an ingredient of the offence and the prosecution need not establish it. Absence of knowledge may be taken in mitigation but does not take the case out of the section. But the prosecution must prove the ordinary mens rea in the second part of the guilty act and it must be proved that he had actually sold or kept for sale the offending article. Such mens rea may be established by circumstantial evidence”. This shows that the element of “guilty intention” is fulfilled the moment the offending act of obscenity or pornography is committed.

In Pawan Kumar v State of Haryana the Supreme Court observed: “In order to secure a conviction the provision (Section 294, I.P.C) requires two particulars to be proved by the prosecution, i.e. (i) the offender has done any obscene act in any public place or has sung, recited or uttered any obscene songs or words in or near any public place; and (ii) has so caused annoyance to others. If the act complained of is not obscene, or is not done in any public place, or the song recited or uttered is not obscene, or is not sung, recited or uttered in or near any public place, or that it causes no annoyance to others, the offence is not committed” .

IV. CONCLUSION

The obscenity or/and pornography is/are not desirable in any form in a civilised society. The same requires a stringent punishment and more so when the future of the young generation is at stake. It must be appreciated that it is not the “enactment” of a law but the desire, will and efforts to accept and enforce it in its true letter and spirit, which can confer the most strongest, secure and safest protection for any purpose. The enforcement of rights against obscenity/pornography requires a “qualitative effort” and not a “quantitative effort. The courts are sensitive to the issue but so must be the citizens of India. In the name of “liberalisation” and “freedom of speech and expression” criminal tendencies degrading the moral fabric of the nation cannot be allowed to operate. We are custodians of “morality” for the future generation and we cannot afford to give it a debased, immoral and perverse society as the heritage. Thus, the bright future requires both negative form of discipline in the form of punishment and positive form of discipline by voluntarily following and cherishing the morality and ideals preserved by India from numerous centuries .