Vulgarity is Not Obscenity: Supreme Court Distinguishes Between Abusive Language and Legal Obscenity

Case Snapshot

• Case Name: Mani @ Subramaniyam v. State Rep by The Deputy Superintendent of Police

• Citation: 2026 INSC 719

• Bench: Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Vipul M. Pancholi

• Date of Judgment: July 17, 2026

• Area of Law: Criminal Law, Obscenity, Criminal Intimidation, Sentencing

Judgment in Brief

The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal, acquitting the appellant under Sections 294(b) (obscenity) and 506(ii) (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, while affirming the conviction under Section 326 (grievous hurt by dangerous weapons). The Court held that the words uttered by the appellant, though abusive and vulgar, did not constitute "obscenity" under Section 294(b) as they lacked lascivious elements or the tendency to deprave and corrupt. The Court also held that the threat made during the altercation did not meet the requirements of criminal intimidation under Section 506(ii), as there was no intention to cause alarm or compel the complainant to do or omit any act. Considering the appellant's age (70 years) and health condition, the sentence was reduced to the period already undergone with a fine of ₹50,000.

Relevant Facts

• The appellant and the complainant's family had a land dispute. On August 24, 2017, an altercation occurred between the appellant and the complainant's nephew (PW-4).

• When the complainant (PW-1) intervened, the appellant allegedly used obscene words and caste-based slurs against him.

• The appellant allegedly brought a billhook (a dangerous weapon) and assaulted PW-1 on his forehead, nose, and left thumb, causing multiple injuries, including a nasal bone fracture.

• The Trial Court convicted the appellant under Sections 294(b), 326, 506(ii) IPC, and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Ac

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.