Case Commentary – DEVIDAS RAMACHANDRA TULJAPURKAR VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS
Subhashini S & Anjanah G J
STUDENTS OF SASTRA DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY
Best Citation – Subhashini S & Anjanah G J, Case Commentary – DEVIDAS RAMACHANDRA TULJAPURKAR VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS, 2 (5) & 41 of 2022, IJLR.
ABSTRACT
“The relation between reality and relativity must haunt the Court’s evaluation of Obscenity, expressed in society’s pervasive humanity, not law’s penal perspective”
Krishna Iyer J[1]
The Supreme Court issued a ruling in May 2015 that upheld a filthy poem about Gandhi, setting a new standard for obscenity when the subject is related to historical figures. The Hicklin Test, which was widely used to test obscenity, and more than 50 decisions from various jurisdictions addressing issues ranging from the appropriateness of tests to the right to freedom of speech and expression[2] were also examined by the court in this decision.
Devidas Tuljapurkar, editorial director and publisher of a magazine for the All India Bank Association, filed an appeal in this matter. He has fought the charges against him for publishing a poetry by Marathi author Vasant Dattatray Gujjar in 1994. The sonnet “GANDHI MALA BHETLA” is said to have insulted Gandhi using vulgar and rude language, and its author was found responsible by the court. Three main areas of interest are covered by the case. It first brings up the shortcomings of the in-court examination of decency. Next considers the court’s clarifications regarding historically reputable figures and raises some relevant issues. The case concludes by advocating a better methodology and making arguments for dissecting the issue in light of its particular circumstances and the intended interest group.
Keywords: Obscenity, Article 19(1)(a), Historically esteemed personality, Section 292 IPC,
[1] Raj Kapoor and Ors. vs. State and Ors. (1980) 1 SCC 43
[2] Section 19(1)(a)