P P HARIS Vs. S I OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is preferred by the 2nd accused against the judgment in Crl.Appeal No.190/2000 of Sessions Judge, Thalassery. Four persons were charge sheeted in C.C. No.690/1999 by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thlassery u/s.3 and 6 of Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The learned Magistrate convicted the 2nd accused u/s.3 and 6 of the Act and sentenced to simple imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs.2000/-, in default simple imprisonment for two months and acquitted A1, A3 and A4 thereunder. Against that, the 2nd accused preferred the above criminal appeal before Sessions Court, where the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved by that, he preferred this revision petition.

(2.) The charge against the accused is that on 29.3.1997 while Circle Inspector of Police and his party were conducting patrol duty, they found a cinema poster of an English film 'Return to Moon Junction', which was inscribed "4 shows in 'Liberty' from 28 onwards". The cinema poster exhibiting the figure of a naked woman was intended to depict a woman indecently and to denigrate public morality. Hence, he seized the poster and registered a case u/s.3 and 6 of the Act. During trial, prosecution examined PW1 to PW8 and marked Exts.P1 to P12. The seized posters were produced in the trial Court but not marked. The incriminating circumstances brought out in evidence were denied by the accused while questioning them, but they did not adduce any defence evidence.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner contended that film was duly certified by the Censor Board under Part II of Cinematograph Act 1952, therefore, Section 3 and 6 of the Act are not applicable in this case. The seized poster was not marked in evidence in the trial Court, which shows that no such indecent representation of woman was found in the poster.