The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur has dismissed a plea filed by advocate Nagendra Singh Gaharwar accusing the Hindi daily Dainik Bhaskar of publishing an obscene advertisement. Justice Achal Kumar Paliwal, delivering the verdict on 29 October 2025, held that the newspaper’s content did not amount to obscenity as defined under Sections 292 and 293 of the Indian Penal Code and the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986.
The order, reserved on 6 October, brought clarity to how courts interpret nudity versus obscenity in light of modern community standards.
Background
The petitioner alleged that the Rewa edition of Dainik Bhaskar carried an "almost nude" image of a woman in an advertisement for the movie Players, published in January 2012. He argued that such a display was indecent and promoted the commercial exploitation of women.
Gaharwar had filed a private complaint under Sections 292 and 293 of IPC-which criminalize obscene publications-and Sections 3, 4, and 6 of the 1986 Act, which prohibit the indecent portrayal of women. Both the trial court and revisional court dismissed his complaint, prompting him to approach the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
On the other hand, Dainik Bhaskar's counsel Sanjiv Kumar Mishra countered that the petitioner lacked locus standi, and that the image in question was part of a legitimate movie advertisement where “sensitive parts were fully blurred.”
Court's Observations
Justice Paliwal undertook an extensive review of Indian and international precedents on obscenity-from Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra to Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal and Ajay Goswami v. Union of India. The judgment revisited the evolution from the Hicklin test of 1868 to the community standards test, emphasising that artistic or commercial content must be judged in its entire context, not in isolation.
Quoting from Aveek Sarkar, the court observed that a picture of a nude or semi-nude woman cannot per se be called obscene unless it has the tendency to arouse depraved thoughts or excite sexual passion.
Applying this test, Justice Paliwal noted that in the Players advertisement, the woman’s "breasts and genitals were sufficiently blurred" and overlaid with the slogan 'Get Ready to Sizzle'. Hence, the depiction could not be said to corrupt or deprave public morals.
"Even if viewed from any angle," the judge remarked, "the photograph published in Dainik Bhaskar does not suggest a depraved mind, nor is it designed to excite sexual passion. It has no tendency to corrupt the minds of its readers."
The court reiterated that nudity by itself is not obscenity and that "a balance must be maintained between freedom of speech and public decency."
Decision
After reviewing the lower courts’ findings, the High Court found no error in their reasoning. It held that the advertisement did not cross the line of public morality and was consistent with evolving social values and artistic expression.
Justice Paliwal concluded:
“There is no sufficient evidence or ground to proceed under Sections 292 and 293 of the IPC or Sections 3, 4, and 6 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986. The petition, therefore, stands dismissed.”
With that, the court reaffirmed the precedence that per se nudity, when presented with artistic or contextual purpose, does not amount to criminal obscenity, effectively closing a case that had lingered for over a decade.
Case Title:- Nagendra Singh Gaharwar v. Manmohan Agrawal
Case Number: M.Cr.C. No. 4891 of 2014