VINAY MOHAN SHARMA Vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the editor, printer and publisher of a magazine titled "eternica". The magazine was found to be publishing obscene and indecent photographs of women. The petitioner was sought to be prosecuted for having committed an offence under Section 292 IPC as also Section 4 and Section 6 of the Indecent representation of Women (Prohibition) Act 1986.

(2.) VIDE order dated 25. 9. 2000, learned acmm recorded a prima facie view that offences as aforenoted were made out holding that the magazine contains photographs depicting naked and semi-naked woman in an obscene manner and that prima facie the magazine had a depraving effect. Notice under Section 251 cr. P. C. was framed.

(3.) PETITIONER pleaded not guilty and immediately proceeded to file a revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge praying that the notice framing the charge be quashed. Vide order dated 7. 2. 2001, learned ASJ. dismissed the revision petition inter alia opining as under:-