The Supreme Court has reserved judgment in the case of the makers of the TVF web series ‘College Romance,’ who challenged the Delhi High Court’s decision to uphold the registration of FIRs against them under Section 67 and 67A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. The FIRs were filed due to the alleged display of vulgar and obscene content in the series.

Section 67A of the IT Act sets punishments or penalties:

The matter was heard by a bench consisting of Justice AS Bopanna and Justice PS Narasimha. The central issue being examined was whether the use of profane language falls under Section 67/67A of the IT Act. Section 67A of the IT Act imposes penalties for publishing or transmitting electronically any material that contains “sexually explicit acts or conduct.” Section 67 of the IT Act penalizes the transmission of “obscene” materials through electronic means. Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing the series makers, argued that there was no offense under Section 67A of the IT Act. He contended that Section 67A pertains to sexually explicit acts, such as pornography, and is unrelated to profanity. He asserted that the FIR only mentioned profanity and, therefore, Sections 67 and 67A were not applicable.Rohatgi emphasized that the use of profane language was common in everyday life and that what was considered obscene varied among individuals. He urged the court to consider the author’s intent when assessing the content, highlighting that these were depictions rather than moral judgments.

Must Read: Delhi High Court: IBC approval bars claims, dispute before Tribunal

Background:-

Senior Advocate Harish Salve, also representing the series makers, argued that the show depicted the typical life of young people, and for today’s youth, the use of such language was not a major concern. He criticized a complainant who perceived the content negatively, asserting that it did not violate freedom of speech. Salve referenced the 1996 Supreme Court judgment in Bobby Art International vs. Om Pal Singh Hoon, where the Court ruled against restraining the screening of the movie ‘Bandit Queen’ solely because it portrayed obscene and graphic events. Salve maintained that the contentious scene did not depict sexual acts but only involved the use of profanity. Sajan Poovayya, Senior Advocate representing the scriptwriter, informed the Court that although the writer was not involved in publishing, transmitting, or producing the series, he was named in the FIR. He expressed concern that this could hinder scriptwriting as any script, if eventually adapted into a movie and transmitted or published, could make the writer liable. Poovayya argued that Sections 67 and 67A should not be blurred, and verbal depictions should not fall under 67A.

Counsel for the Delhi Police contended that even when applying the community standards test, the series failed to pass muster. They argued that the web series focused on sexual activity and the desires of young people, potentially normalizing such behavior. The counsel also pointed out that while ‘Bandit Queen’ was certified by the censor board, web series content was not as regulated, prompting the Information and Broadcasting Ministry to issue notifications to control such content. The Delhi Police expressed concern that the makers were advocating for an American-style approach where everything is allowed, potentially undermining Indian values.
The Delhi High Court ruled that the language used in the web series ‘College Romance’ did not meet the moral decency community test of common language and bordered on obscenity. The High Court observed that the use of vulgar language on public platforms and social media, accessible to young children, required serious consideration. The High Court heard petitions from TVF Media Labs Pvt. Ltd., the casting director of ‘College Romance,’ and its lead actors challenging the registration of FIRs against them under Section 67 and 67A of the IT Act. The High Court upheld the registration of FIRs, stating that the content of the series could attract criminality under Section 67 of the IT Act. It found that the series was morally depraving to impressionable minds and that when self-regulatory bodies failed to take action, people had no choice but to turn to the courts for relief.

The Supreme Court has reserved judgment case of the ‘College Romance’ 

The Supreme Court has reserved judgment in the case of the ‘College Romance’ web series makers who challenged the FIRs registered against them for alleged obscene and vulgar content. The key issue is whether the use of profane language falls under Section 67 and 67A of the IT Act. The case raises important questions about freedom of speech, community standards, and the regulation of online content.

facebook