BACK TO IT ACT
IT Act 2000

Section 67

Publishing Obscene Material in Electronic Form

THE STATUTE

Original Text

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.

Simplified

Section 67 is the digital-era successor to IPC Section 292 (sale of obscene material). The obscenity test follows the Hicklin standard as modified by Indian courts: material that is lascivious, appeals to prurient interest, or tends to deprave and corrupt. Indian courts have progressively moved toward a community standards test — what would shock the average reasonable Indian, not the most susceptible person. The escalating punishment scheme (3 years for first offence, 5 for subsequent) is a graduated deterrence mechanism. Section 67 covers all forms of electronic publication: websites, emails, WhatsApp forwards, social media posts, and peer-to-peer file sharing. It is a cognizable and non-bailable offence, meaning police can arrest without warrant and the accused must apply for bail. Section 67 is supplemented by 67A (sexually explicit content — more severe) and 67B (child sexual abuse material — most severe). The provision excludes material for bona fide heritage, artistic, literary, or religious purposes — a defence that must be established by the accused.

Common Queries

Indian courts apply the Ranjit Udeshi test (from the Supreme Court's 1965 judgment) — whether the material, taken as a whole, has a tendency to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to immoral influences. Courts increasingly also consider contemporary community standards.
Section 67 targets material that is 'lascivious or appeals to prurient interest'. Section 67A specifically targets material depicting actual or simulated sexual acts. Section 67A carries a higher penalty (5 years vs 3 years on first conviction).
It depends on the content. Courts have held that isolated private messages must meet a high threshold of obscenity. However, mass circulation of obscene content or targeted harassment through obscene messages is actionable.

Legal Evolution

Original IT Act 2000 included Section 67. The 2008 Amendment added Sections 67A and 67B to create a graduated scheme: obscene (67) → explicitly sexual (67A) → child sexual abuse (67B). This mirrors the approach in UK's Obscene Publications Act and the US Communications Decency Act, though the Indian provision is more broadly worded than its US counterpart (which was largely struck down).

Key Amendments

2008 Amendment replaced the original Section 67 with a revised text adding Sections 67A and 67B for the graduated scheme.

Fine amounts increased significantly by the 2008 Amendment.

Landmark Precedents

Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (1965)

AIR 1965 SC 881
RELEVANCE

Established India's foundational obscenity test (Hicklin standard), which courts continue to apply to Section 67 prosecutions.

Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal (2014)

(2014) 4 SCC 257
RELEVANCE

Supreme Court adopted 'community standards' test over Hicklin for obscenity — now the primary test in Section 67 prosecutions.