Justice N Anand Venkatesh mentioned these observations facts while suppress the procedures started by the Ambattur police against a 28-year-old who was reserved under the POCSO Act and IT Represent downloading youngster sexual entertainment recordings from the web. The Court quashed proceedings against an accused after he volunteered to undergo counselling for porn de-addiction.
The Madras High Court has noted that Generation Z kids are grappling with porn addiction and society must properly educate them instead of punishing them.
Justice N Anand Venkatesh made these observations while quashing the proceedings initiated by the Ambattur police against a 28-year-old who was booked under the POCSO Act and IT Act for downloading child pornography videos from the internet.
In the verdict, Justice Venkatesh pointed out that the petitioner pledged to seek counselling to get rid of the addiction.
“Even assuming that the accused person had watched child pornography video, that strictly will not fall within the scope of Section 14(1) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. Since he has not used a child or children for pornographic purposes… it can only be construed as a moral decay on the part of the accused person.”
Further, it was stated that to constitute an offence under Section 67B of the Information Technology Act, 2000, the accused person must have published, transmitted, and created material depicting children in sexually explicit acts.
“The materials that have been placed before this Court do not make out an offence against the petitioner under Section 67-B of Information Technology Act, 2000, and Section 14(1) of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012,” the order added.
The Court also recorded that Harish had volunteered to undergo counselling to get rid of such addiction.
“To make out an offence under Section 14(1) of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, a child or children must have been used for pornography purposes. This would mean that the accused person should have used the child for pornographic purposes. Even assuming that the accused person had watched child pornography video, that strictly will not fall within the scope of Section 14(1) of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences Act, 2012…
…In order to constitute an offence under Section 67-B of Information Technology Act, 2000, the accused person must have published, transmitted, created material depicting children in sexual explicit act or conduct. A careful reading of this provision does not make watching a child pornography, per se, an offence under Section 67-B of Information Technology Act, 2000,” the High Court said.
Citing a Kerala High Court verdict, the judge said that the moment a person tries to circulate or distribute or publicly exhibit such videos, only then would the ingredients of an offence under Section 292 (sale etc of obscene books etc) of the Indian Penal Code kick in.
On a parting note, the Court lamented the rise in porn addiction among the youth, observing,
“There used to be addiction in smoking, drinking, etc. and there is a growing rise in addiction watching porn photos/videos. This, is in view of the fact that it is easily available in the electronic gadgets and by repeatedly watching the same, it becomes a habit and ultimately, the person gets addicted.”
Advocate JN Naresh Kumar appeared for the petitioner. Additional Public Prosecutor A Damodaran appeared for the respondent Ambattur Police.
+ There are no comments
Add yours