Punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form
Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 deals with punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form. Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read The Act came into force on 17 Oct 2000.
Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form, any material which is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it, shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees and in the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees.
Section 67, The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Act 21 of 2000).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Sharat Babu Digumarti vs Govt of Nct of Delhi
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an alleged offence pertains to obscene material in electronic form, the offence falls exclusively under the special provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (specifically Sections 67, 67A, and 67B), and not under the general provisions of Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code. The IT Act, being a special enactment with specific provisions for electronic records and containing an overriding effect clause (Section 81), prevails over the IPC. Therefore, an accused who has been discharged from prosecution under Section 67 of the IT Act cannot subsequently be prosecuted under Section 292 IPC for the same conduct involving obscene material in electronic form. The principle that special laws prevail over general laws, particularly when both contain non-obstante clauses, mandates that the IT Act provisions apply to electronic records, and the protection and effect of Section 79 (intermediary protection) cannot be ignored or negated.
On this section: Punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form. Court held this is the applicable provision for electronic obscenity, not Section 292 IPC
-
Arun Pathak vs The State of Uttar Pradesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail primarily on the ground of apprehension of imminent arrest and custodial interrogation, and the State, through its counsel, explicitly informs the Supreme Court that it does not require custodial interrogation of the petitioner and that statutory notice under Section 41A CrPC has been served, the Special Leave Petition becomes infructuous and stands disposed of without adjudication on the substantive merits of bail, as the fundamental cause for the petition—the threat of arrest—ceases to exist.
On this section: Allegations of publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form
-
Subhranshu Rout @ Gugul v. State of Odisha
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Bail refused in a rape/IT-Act pornography case. The Court recognised a victim's right to be forgotten / right to erasure as part of Article 21 privacy (Puttaswamy applied) against non-consensual circulation of intimate images, while holding that CrPC 439 bail could not be used to force takedown as a condition in lieu of custody analysis. AFR full judgment of S.K. Panigrahi J. Do not use same-date order-7.pdf (unverified).
On this section: Transmission of obscene electronic material (IT 67) framed the pornography/rape-video circulation; RTBF is the civil-privacy counterpart.
-
Kaizad Rayomand Kerawala vs State of Gujarat
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a criminal case arises from a private dispute with overwhelmingly civil flavour, and the parties have amicably settled their entire dispute with no serious injury or damage caused, the High Court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR if continuation of the criminal proceeding would cause oppression and injustice to the accused and would be contrary to the interests of justice, provided the court is satisfied that the settlement is genuine and the possibility of conviction is remote.
On this section: The offence under which the FIR was registered. The court found that this offence, arising from a private dispute with civil flavour, could be quashed based on settlement.
-
ASHWIN MARULASIDDAPPA vs RAJARAJESHWARI NAGAR P S
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A Court of Session has the jurisdiction to grant transit anticipatory bail for a limited period to a resident within its jurisdiction, even if the offence was committed in another state, to enable the applicant to approach the jurisdictional court.
On this section: Punishment for publishing obscene material in electronic form.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Made under this section, and citing it
2 instruments name this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.
Questions about Section 67
What have the courts held on Section 67 of the Information Technology Act?
Sharat Babu Digumarti vs Govt of Nct of Delhi (14 Dec 2016) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form. Court held this is the applicable provision for electronic obscenity, not Section 292 IPC. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2016 to 2023.
How do I find court cases under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: IT Act 67, section 67 IT Act, section 67 of the Information Technology Act. People searching for it also type it act 67 a in hindi and it act 67a. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Sharat Babu Digumarti vs Govt of Nct of Delhi (14 Dec 2016).
What should I read with Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. 2 instruments name it without being made under it, most recently Notification for rescinding of earlier notifications G.S.R. 181(E) and G.S.R. 529(E) (2010), then Notification no. G.S.R.181(E) dated 27.2.2003 regarding establishment of Computer Emergency Response-in India (CERT-In) and the procedure for blocking of websites (2003).
When did Section 67 of the Information Technology Act come into force?
Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, commonly called obscene material online, and cited as IT Act 67, came into force on 17 Oct 2000, having been enacted on 09 Jun 2000. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 2. Definitions1304 words
- 87. Power of Central Government to make rules877 words
- 43. Penalty and compensation for damage to computer, computer system, etc506 words
- 46. Power to adjudicate370 words
- 89. Power of Controller to make regulations345 words
- 70B. Indian Computer Emergency Response Team to serve as national agency for incident response326 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.