THE INDECENT REPRESENTATION OF WOMAN (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1986 |
|
|
|
What is the short title of the Act that prohibits the indecent representation of women? |
The Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 |
What functions does the short title of an Act serves? |
To provide an easy reference name of the statute |
What is the aim of the preamble of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986? |
Prohibit the indecent representation of women through advertisements, publications, writings, paintings, figures, or in any other manner. |
What is the Act no. of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act? |
ACT NO. 60 OF 1986 |
In which official document is the commencement date of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 required to be published? |
Official Gazette |
Which form of media is not explicitly mentioned in the preamble of the Act but is covered through interpretation and application? |
courts have extended the scope to digital and online platforms, interpreting "any other manner" broadly. |
What Section 1 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 states? |
Short title, extent and commencement |
The Act known as the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act was enacted in which year? |
1986 |
After the amendment of 2019, the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act extends to? |
whole of India |
As per Section 1(2), originally the Act did not extend to which region? |
Jammu and Kashmir |
The Act came into force on? |
2nd October 1987 |
The phrase “except the State of Jammu and Kashmir” became redundant due to? |
Article 370 abrogation in 2019 |
Which provision deal with “Definitions”? |
Sec 2 |
What provision defines the term “advertisement"? |
Sec 2(a) |
Under Section 2(a) of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, the term "advertisement" includes? |
Visible representations through light, sound, smoke, or gas |
In which case did the Delhi High Court hold that even hoardings and posters with sexually suggestive images may amount to "advertisement" under Section 2(a)? |
Ajay Goswami v. Union of India |
Which best illustrates an “advertisement” under Section 2(a)? |
A billboard showing a woman in suggestive posture |
What are the examples which do not considered as an “advertisement” under Section 2(a)? |
A tweet sent privately to a friend A book on gender studies A painting in a private residence |
The expression "visible representation made by means of light, sound, smoke or gas" in Section 2(a) suggests inclusion of which medium? |
Audio-visual advertisements in cinema halls |
The inclusion of "light, sound, smoke or gas" in the definition of advertisement under Section 2(a) shows that the legislature intended to cover: |
Both traditional and unconventional advertising mediums |
Which provision deal with the term “distribution”? |
Sec 2(b) |
What best defines “distribution” under Section 2(b) of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986? |
Distribution by way of samples, advertisement, or in any other manner |
In which case did the Delhi High Court observe that “distribution” of indecent representation includes online circulation through social media platforms? |
Kamlesh Vaswani v. Union of India, (2013) |
Under Section 2(b), the word “distribution” can be interpreted to include which acts? |
Emailing indecent image Posting indecent posters on public walls Sharing indecent content via apps |
Distribution” under Section 2(b) includes which methods? |
Physically handing over indecent magazines Offering free pamphlets with obscene imagery Using advertising banners with indecent female images |
What is the purpose of including “samples” in the definition of “distribution” under Section 2(b)? |
Widen the scope of the term to include promotional or trial-based indecent distribution |
In the context of Section 2(b), which mode of "distribution" would be punishable under the Act if it involves indecent representation of women? |
Direct sale Public exhibition Internet transmission |
Which provision defines the term “indecent representation of women”? |
Sec 2(c ) |
Under Section 2(c) of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, which best defines “indecent representation of women”? |
Any depiction of a woman in a manner that is indecent, derogatory, or likely to deprave public morality |
The phrase “likely to deprave, corrupt or injure public morality or morals” in Section 2(c) primarily focuses on? |
Protecting societal moral standards |
What are the criterions under Section 2(c) for determining “indecent representation of women”? |
Depiction of a woman’s body or part in a derogatory way Representation that may injure public morality Depiction likely to corrupt or deprave |
The term "indecent" in Section 2(c) is interpreted in light of? |
Community standards test and constitutional values |
Which examples may amount to "indecent representation of women" under Section 2(c)? |
A magazine cover sexualizing a woman for commercial purposes |
What is the legislative intent behind Section 2(c) of the Act? |
Prevent the objectification and commodification of women |
In the context of Section 2(c), which landmark judgment held that artistic freedom is not absolute and may be restricted for decency and morality? |
Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon, (1996) 4 SCC 1 |
What correctly distinguishes "indecent representation" from "obscenity"? |
Indecent representation is broader and includes derogatory depictions not necessarily obscene |
Which provision deal with the term “label”? |
Sec 2(d) |
What does the term “label” include under Section 2(d) of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986? |
Any written, marked, stamped, printed, or graphic matter on a package |
Under Section 2(d), what would fall under the definition of “label”? |
Printed advertisement on a bottle Marked content directly on the wrapper of a product A sticker on a package with an image |
What is the primary purpose of including "label" in Section 2(d)? |
Include packaging in the ambit of indecent representation |
Which statement is true regarding Section 2(d) of the Act? |
Labels must be affixed or appear upon packages to fall under the Act |
In which case might a "label" be held responsible for indecent representation under the Act? |
A wrapper showing a woman in a sexually suggestive pose |
Which case upheld that packaging materials and labels must conform to decency standards under the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act? |
Ajay Goswami v. Union of India, (2007) 1 SCC 143 |
Suppose a cosmetic company distributes a soap bar with a wrapper showing a semi-nude model in a provocative pose. Under the Indecent Representation of Women Act, this would likely be an issue under? |
Section 2(d) – Label |
What are the key elements in defining a "label" under Section 2(d)? |
It must appear upon a package It can be printed or graphic matter It must be written, stamped, or marked |
Which provision deal with the term “package”? |
Sec 2(e ) |
What does the term “package” include under Section 2(e) of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986? |
Box, carton, tin or other container |
Under Section 2(e), which is not expressly mentioned in the definition of “package”? |
Envelope |
What is the primary reason for defining “package” in the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986? |
restrict the use of packaging as a means to spread indecent representations of women. |
The expression “or other container” in Section 2(e) is an example of? |
an inclusive definition, implying that besides box, carton, and tin, other similar containers are also covered. |
If an item containing indecent representation of women is sold in a metal can, will it be covered under Section 2(e)? |
Yes, tin includes metal cans |
Suppose a toy is sold in a plastic container showing a woman in indecent posture. Can action be taken under the Act? |
Yes, as the plastic container is a “package” |
Which legal principle allows “package” to include items similar in nature to boxes, tins, and cartons? |
Ejusdem generis |
Which provision deal with the term ““prescribed”? |
Sec 2(f) |
Under Section 2(f) of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, the term “prescribed” refers to? |
Rules made under the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 |
Which authority is empowered to make “prescribed” rules under the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986? |
Central Government |
In absence of rules under the Act, the term “prescribed” in Section 2(f)? |
Cannot be enforced effectively |
Which case law highlights the significance of “rules prescribed” under statutory provisions for enforcement? |
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Johri Mal, (2004) 4 SCC 714 |
The term “prescribed” is a common legislative drafting term that usually indicates? |
Delegation of rule-making power to the executive |
The word “indecent” in the Act is interpreted in light of? |
Contemporary social standards and judicial discretion |
Which provision deal with “Prohibition of advertisements containing indecent representation of women”? |
Sec 3 |
Under Section 3 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, which actions are prohibited? |
Publishing an advertisement with suggestive images of women Participating in the publication of indecent representation of women Exhibiting an advertisement with indecent portrayal of women |
Which case law laid down that depiction of women must be judged from the standpoint of public decency and morality? |
Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal, (2014) (the SC ruled depiction of nudity should be seen through the lens of artistic value, public morality, and decency) |
What is true regarding the scope of Section 3? |
It applies to all forms of advertisements, including electronic and digital media |
What is the primarily aim of Section 3 of the Indecent Representation of Women Act, 1986? |
Protect women from derogatory, vulgar, or sexualised portrayal in ads |
Which entities may be held liable for violating Section 3? |
The ad designer The media agency publishing it The advertiser who pays for it |
The test of “indecency” under Section 3 must be applied? |
From the perspective of contemporary community standards |
What constitutes a violation of Section 3? |
An advertisement with nudity used for titillation A deodorant ad portraying women as sexual objects A lingerie ad with suggestive overtones and provocative poses |
Who is prohibited under Section 3 from publishing or causing to be published any advertisement containing indecent representation of women? |
Any person |
The expression “causes to be published” under Section 3 includes: |
Indirect or direct involvement in publication |
Which case held that freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a) is subject to reasonable restrictions including decency and morality? |
Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal |
Section 3 makes the indecent representation of women in advertisements? |
A punishable offence |
Which mediums would fall under the scope of Section 3? |
Newspaper advertisements Posters Online banner ads |
In which case the Supreme Court discussed about Censorship and safeguards for minors in media? |
Ajay Goswami v. Union of India (2007) |
Section 3 prohibits which kind of advertisement? |
Advertisements with representation of women that is lascivious, appealing to prurient interest or corrupting public morals |
The phrase "likely to deprave, corrupt or injure public morality" as used in context of Section 3 originates from which test? |
Hicklin test |
What would likely constitute a violation of Section 3? |
Poster of a woman promoting alcohol using a sexualized image Billboard showing a woman in a provocative pose to sell perfume Internet advertisement depicting women as sexual commodities |
Under Section 3, an offence is committed when the advertisement? |
Contains indecent representation regardless of intent |
In S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal (2010), the Court emphasized that: |
Public morality cannot be used to restrict individual expression unless it causes tangible harm |
An actor appearing in an indecent advertisement may be liable under Section 3 if? |
They profited from the publication |
In case of a corporate advertisement, liability under Section 3 may extend to? |
Every person responsible for its publication, including directors |
Which provision deal with “Prohibition of publication or sending by post of books, pamphlets, etc., containing indecent representation of women”? |
Sec 4 |
Which act is prohibited under Section 4 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986? |
Sending a novel by post which contains vulgar depictions of women |
What all are prohibits under Section 4 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986? |
Publication or sending by post any book, pamphlet, paper, slide, film, writing or drawing containing indecent representation of women |
Which modes are specifically prohibited under Section 4 if they contain indecent representation of women? |
Book, pamphlet, paper, slide, film, writing, drawing or painting |
Sending indecent representation of women by post is punishable under which section of the Act? |
Section 4 |
Which landmark case discussed the balance between artistic freedom and public decency while dealing with controversial content? |
Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal |
Under Section 4, the act of publishing or mailing indecent material is considered? |
A criminal offence |
The term “pamphlet” under Section 4 would include? |
Any small booklet or printed matter meant for free circulation |
Which acts does fall within the prohibition under Section 4? |
Mailing a cartoon with sexually suggestive depictions of women Sending a magazine with lascivious depictions of women Distributing a hand-drawn sketch with indecent poses of women |
Which acts does not fall within the prohibition under Section 4? |
Sending a textbook on female anatomy for a medical course |
What does the Court emphasized in Director General, Doordarshan v. Anand Patwardhan? |
Artistic work should not violate decency and morality |
What is the core intent behind Section 4 of the Act? |
To restrict the circulation of content that objectifies or morally corrupts using women’s images |
To whom Section 4 applies? |
Individuals who distribute physical or visual material through print or post |
What does the Supreme Court upheld in Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra? |
That obscenity must be judged by its potential to deprave and corrupt |
What best reflects a violation of Section 4? |
Mailing a comic book that sexually objectifies female characters |
What differentiates Section 4 from Section 3 of the same Act? |
Section 4 targets distribution of indecent representation through books, slides, etc., not just advertisements |
The test of obscenity applied under Section 4 is based on? |
Whether the content tends to deprave or corrupt persons likely to read or view it |
Which provision deal with “Powers to enter and search”? |
Sec 5 |
Who is empowered under Section 5 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, to enter and search any place suspected of violating the Act? |
Any Gazetted Officer authorized by the State Government |
Under Section 5, the power of entry and search must be exercised? |
At all reasonable times |
The authority to search under Section 5 must be? |
Based on reasonable belief that the place contains contraband material |
The power under Section 5 can be exercised with? |
Such assistance as considered necessary by the officer |
In the context of Section 5, which best describes the scope of the search operation? |
Can include seizure and sealing of material |
Which case law discussed the powers of entry and search under similar statutes regulating obscenity and representation? |
Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon, (1996) 4 SCC 1 |
The powers under Section 5 of the Act are conferred by? |
The State Government |
Which principles must be followed while exercising powers under Section 5? |
Due process and respect for privacy |
If an officer conducts a search without proper authorization under Section 5, it is considered? |
Illegal and void ab initio |
What is the term “reasonable time” in Section 5 implies? |
As per rules framed under the Act |
Which rule of natural justice applies to powers exercised under Section 5? |
Audi alteram partem (hear the other side) Nemo judex in causa sua (no one a judge in their own cause) |
Under Section 5, if a person resists the search, the officer may? |
Use reasonable force |
Which legal provision governs the procedural aspects of search and seizure not specified in the IRWA? |
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and now BNSS |
The power of entry and search under Section 5 can be exercised if the authorized officer has: |
Reason to believe that an offence under the Act has been or is being committed |
Which legal safeguard must be complied with during a search under Section 5? |
The officer must record reasons and prepare a seizure list |
Section 5 provides the power to search premises suspected of: |
Being used for production, storage or exhibition of materials involving indecent representation of women |
Seizure under Section 5 must follow procedures laid down in which section of CRPC? |
section 94 of Criminal Procedure Code |
To whom the term “authorized officer” under Section 5 refers to? |
Any officer appointed by the Central Government or State Government by notification |
What does the Supreme Court emphasized in State of Maharashtra v. Tapas D. Neogy (1999)? |
Powers to search must be exercised fairly and in accordance with CrPC |
The power to enter and search under Section 5 can be exercised? |
Where there is reasonable belief of an offence under this Act being committed |
Which of the following must immediately follow a search conducted under Section 5? |
Seizure and production of material before a Magistrate |
Whether any Gazetted Officer entry into a private dwelling house without a warrant? |
No
|
What can the Gazetted Officer seize under Section 5? |
any advertisement or any book, pamphlet, paper, slide film, writing, drawing, painting, photograph, representation or figure |
What will be the next step of officer where he seizes anything under clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 5? |
he shall, as soon as may be, inform the nearest Magistrate and take his orders as to the custody thereof |
What does the Supreme Court ruled in Pooran Mal v. Director of Inspection (1974)? |
Even if search is illegal, evidence obtained may still be admissible unless fundamental rights are violated |
What is the purpose of Section 5? |
Prevent the spread of material involving indecent representation of women through timely inspection |
Under Section 5, an authorized officer can search and seize material from? |
Any place where there is reason to believe such material is kept |
Failure to comply with proper procedure during Section 5 search may result in? |
Evidence being excluded or challenged in court |
Which provision deal with “Penalty”? |
Sec 6 |
Under Section 6, what is the maximum punishment for a first conviction for contravening Section 3 or 4 of the Act? |
Imprisonment up to 2 years and fine of ₹2,000 |
Under Section 6, what is the minimum imprisonment term for a second or subsequent conviction? |
Six months |
Under Section 6, the imprisonment term for a second or subsequent conviction may extend up to? |
extend to five years |
Under Section 6, what is the minimum fine for a second or subsequent conviction? |
ten thousand rupees |
Under Section 6, the fine for a second or subsequent conviction may extend up to? |
extend to one lakh rupees. |
Which provisions must be violated to attract penalty under Section 6? |
Section 3 and Section 4 |
In the case of Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal (2014), what principle was laid down with respect to “indecent representation”? |
The test must be from the perspective of an average, reasonable man |
Under Section 6, the enhanced punishment for repeat offenders serves the purpose of? |
Deterrence |
Which provision deal with “Offences by companies”? |
Sec 7 |
Under Section 7 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, which persons can be held liable when a company commits an offence under the Act? |
“Every person in charge of, and responsible to, the company” liable. |
What are the valid defenses for a person held liable under Section 7 for an offence by a company? |
The person had no knowledge of the offence The offence was committed without the person's consent The person exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence |
In K. R. Purushothaman v. State of Kerala, what principle was reiterated in the context of company liability under similar statutory provisions? |
Liability arises only when the person was in charge of and responsible for conduct of business |
Under Section 7(2), which company officials can also be held liable if the offence was committed with their consent or connivance? |
director, manager, secretary, or any other officer, if the offence was with their knowledge or consent. |
Which case emphasized that vicarious liability under penal statutes like Section 7 requires specific statutory provision? |
S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Neeta Bhalla (2005) (the Supreme Court held that criminal liability of company officials must be based on statutory language.) |
What does the term “company” include under Section 7 explanation (a) of the Act? |
The explanation includes body corporate, firm or association of individuals. |
What is the meaning of “director” in relation to a firm as per the explanation to Section 7? |
Explanation (b) states that in case of a firm, “director” means a partner in the firm. |
In the context of Section 7, what best defines “vicarious liability”? |
A person is criminally liable for the act of another only if provided by law |
In which scenarios is the company liable under Section 7 of the Act? |
A manager knowingly allows indecent advertising Director is aware and supports the campaign The offence is committed on behalf of the company with full board approval |
Whether the sole proprietorship is considered a “company” under Section 7? |
No
|
What does the Supreme Court observed in Sunil Bharti Mittal v. CBI (2015)? |
Criminal liability cannot be fastened only on the basis of designation |
What does the Supreme Court held that in SMS Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Neeta Bhalla (2005)? |
Specific averment is needed in the complaint about the role of the accused |
Section 7 requires what for establishing individual liability in a company offence? |
Proof that the person was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of business |
What does the Supreme Court reiterated in K.K. Ahuja v. V.K. Vora (2009)? |
Knowledge and involvement must be shown to prosecute officers of a company |
What is the intent of Section 7? |
Prevent companies from avoiding liability by hiding behind their corporate identity |
Section 7 applies to which types of companies? |
All companies, firms, and associations of individuals |
Which provision deal with “Offences to be cognizable and bailable”? |
Sec 8 |
What implies “Cognizable offence" under Section 8 of the Act? |
Police can arrest without warrant and begin investigation without magistrate's permission |
What best describes a bailable offence under Section 8? |
Bail is a matter of right |
What does the Supreme Court held in Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. (1994)? |
Arrest must be justified even in cognizable offences |
What is true about the classification under Section 8? |
All offences under the Act are cognizable and bailable |
The term "cognizable offence" is defined under which provision of CrPC? |
Section 2(c) |
The term "cognizable offence" is defined under which provision of BNSS? |
Section 2(g) |
What does the Supreme Court ruled in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014)? |
Officers must avoid unnecessary arrest in cognizable and bailable cases unless justified |
What best describes the rationale behind making offences under this Act "bailable"? |
To strike a balance between deterrence and fair procedure |
What does the declaration under Section 8 affects? |
Manner of investigation, arrest, and grant of bail |
Section 8 ensures that offences under the Act can be? |
Investigated and prosecuted by police without prior sanction from Magistrate |
What does the Supreme Court stressed in Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal (2007)? |
Grant of bail should balance individual liberty and societal interest |
What does the classification of offences as bailable under Section 8 means? |
The accused has the statutory right to be released on bail |
In Rajeev Chandrasekhar v. Union of India (2023), the High Court observed in context of similar statutory offences that? |
Statutory classification must guide bail decisions |
Which provision deal with “Protection of action taken in good faith”? |
Sec 9 |
The phrase “in good faith” under Section 9 is interpreted in the context of? |
Bona fide intention without negligence |
In which landmark case did the Supreme Court observe that “good faith” implies due care and attention and not mere absence of malice? |
State of Bihar v. P.P. Sharma, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 222 |
Which Judgment emphasized that “good faith” must be established by the person claiming immunity? |
Indian Oil Corpn. v. NEPC India Ltd., (2006) 6 SCC 736 |
In the context of administrative law, the immunity under Section 9 resembles which doctrine? |
Doctrine of sovereign immunity |
Against what Section 9 aims to provide protection? |
Civil and criminal liability for those acting in good faith |
In Tata Sons Ltd. v. Greenpeace International (2011), the Court discussed the necessity of? |
The protection of officials acting in good faith in legal procedures |
Under Section 9, the person acting in good faith must prove: |
That no unlawful intent or motive was involved in the act |
In Rajender Singh v. Union of India (1999), the Court highlighted the importance of? |
Protecting government officials from legal action if acting in good faith under the Act |
What does the Court affirmed In State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (2013)? |
In good faith and as part of official duties under the Act |
What does the term “good faith” under Section 9? |
Acting without malice, fraud, or improper motive |
In the case Sanjay Dutt v. State of Maharashtra (1994), the Court emphasized that? |
All actions taken by authorities must be scrutinized for good faith |
What will happen under Section 9, if a person acting in good faith faces legal action? |
they are Protected from prosecution, as long as the action was part of official duties |
Which provision deal with “Power to make rules”? |
Sec 10 |
Under Section 10, who is empowered to make rules for carrying out the provisions of the Act? |
The Central Government |
The rules under Section 10 are required to be laid before? |
Both Houses of Parliament |
The rules framed under Section 10 of the Act must be? |
Laid before both Houses of Parliament for a total period of 30 days |
What does the laying of rules before Parliament under Section 10 includes? |
while it is in session |
What are the purposes for which the Central Government may make rules under Section 10(2)? |
The manner of seizure Procedure for forfeiture Powers of search and entry |
In which case did the court reiterate that rules framed under an Act must not go beyond the scope of the enabling provision (applicable to Section 10)? |
State of Tamil Nadu v. P. Krishnamurthy (2006) (The Supreme Court held that delegated legislation can be challenged if it is ultra vires the parent Act.) |
What would be the nature of the rules made under Section 10? |
Consistent with the objectives of the Act |
In Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms (2002), the Supreme Court emphasized that? |
Rules made must not exceed the scope of the enabling statute |
The purpose of granting rule-making powers under Section 10 is to? |
Ensure that the law is adapted and operationalized for practical implementation |
Which is an essential requirement for the rules made under Section 10? |
They must be published in a government gazette |
In Prakash Singh v. Union of India (2006), the Court discussed the importance of? |
Delegated rule-making authority being exercised within legislative intent |
The rules under Section 10 could cover which aspects? |
Administrative procedures for handling cases of indecent representation |
In the case of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajesh Yadav (2008), the Supreme Court reaffirmed that? |
Statutory rule-making powers must be exercised reasonably and in accordance with the law |
What will be the consequences if any rule under Section 10 is inconsistent with the provisions of the Act? |
Will be void and ineffective |
What does the court held in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)? |
Legislative powers delegated to the executive must adhere to the intent of the law |
What are the subjects for which rules could be made under Section 10 of the Act? |
The procedure for investigation of offences Methods of adjudicating penalties Procedures for handling public complaints |
What does the Supreme Court ruled in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)? |
The power to make rules must be exercised within the constitutional framework and not in violation of fundamental rights |