They further held that since no attempt was made in the film to explore the meaning of the imagery beyond engaging the viewer in a voyeuristic erotic experience, the public distribution of such a video could outrage and insult the feelings of believing Christians and constitute the criminal offence of blasphemy. After a stay of 25 days in the hospital, it was for the hospital to give a clear indication as to what was to be done regarding all possible dangers which a baby in these circumstances faces.

We are not prepared to infer from ˜Informed about alarms signs that the parents were cautioned about ROP in this case. likewise an image does not become a satirical if the observer does not comprehend or detect any message in the work in question; that where the images depicted in the work product convey no message but only a disgusting combination of lewd acts and words whose only effect is to debase, insult and ridicule the person portrayed " this is neither criticism nor satire; and that the artistic freedom is not unlimited and where rights and reputation of others are involved; where there is conflict with human dignity artistic freedom must always be subordinated to personality rights.

guidelines do not deal with the said aspect of the matter and hence the necessity of incorporating the same in the present directions to ensure the independence, impartiality and the neutrality of the fourth estate which is vital to the growth and sustenance of democracy will have to be weighed and considered by us. Apart from the cast list which appears on the screen for a few seconds, the viewer has no means to knowing from the film itself that the person dressed as a nun in the video is intended to be St Teresa or that the other woman who appears is intended to be her psyche.

Visions of Ecstasy portrays, inter alia, a female character astride the recumbent body of the crucified Christ engaged in an act of an overtly sexual nature. The parties are also not at issue that on the date of the lease, no plantation as defined in Section 2 (44) did exist on the demised land. In that view of the matter, the appellants plea based on Section 3 (1) (viii) lacks foundation in the plaint and in the strict sense of the term as the debate has its genesis in a suit, ought not to have been entertained by the High Supreme Court of India Lawyer.

It must, however, be noted that the discharge summary shows that the above writing was in the nature of a scrawl in the corner of the discharge summary and we are in agreement with the finding of the NCDRC that the said remarks are only a hastily written general warning and nothing more. No attempt is made Lawyers in Supreme Court of India the video to explain its historical background. This discharge summary neither discloses a warning to the infants parents that the infant might develop ROP against which certain precautions must be taken, nor any signs that the Doctors were themselves cautious of the dangers of development of ROP.

The plaint, to reiterate does not refer to such plantation on the date of the lease, as well. It is obvious that it did not occur to the respondents to advise the appellant that the baby is required to be seen by a paediatric ophthalmologist since there was a possibility of occurrence of ROP to avert permanent blindness. Learned counsel elaborated their submissions in support of the reasons recorded by the High Supreme Court of India Lawyer by referring to counter affidavits and various documents on record.

The court observed that Hicklin test in Regina (supra) was not accepted in the said case. Thereafter dealing with the case, the European Court of Human Rights held:- 61. (57) In reply, learned senior counsel Mr. Thus, the submission of Mr. In course of the arguments before this Court, however, the learned senior counsel for the appellant has not pursued the plea based on private forest and has confined the assailment qua plantation as per clause 3 (1) (viii) of Act 1963.

This is more so, as the records substantiate that the contention based on plantation was raised for the first time before that forum. The Supreme Court India Law firms, also referred to Freadman v. A connected facet of the matter which cannot be ignored is the power of the Government to give/award advertisements to selected media houses and the concomitant issue of freedom of press. Patronization of any particular media house(s) must be avoided and award of advertisements must be on an equal basis to all newspapers who may, however, be categorized depending upon their circulation.

Nariman is that freedom of speech and expression is not absolute and any work of art cannot derail the prohibition in law. Award of advertisements, naturally, brings financial benefit to the particular media house/newspaper group. (b) that the motion picture is not saved by any redeeming social value; and (c) that it is patently offensive because it is opposed to contemporary standards. The national authorities, using powers that are not themselves incompatible with the Convention, considered that the manner in which such imagery was treated placed the focus of the work less on the erotic feelings of the character than on those of the audience, which is the primary function of pornography.

Suresh appearing for the respondents-accused supported the impugned order and contended that no case is made out to interfere in the impugned order.