292 vs 294
The transition of obscenity laws from IPC to the new Sanhita with updated fines.
What Changed?
Renumbered IPC 292 (Obscene Material) to BNS 294.
Renumbered IPC 294 (Obscene Acts/Songs) to BNS 296.
Fine for selling obscene material (BNS 294) is now up to ₹5,000.
Maintains the Hicklin Test and Prurient Interest standards for determining obscenity.
Verdict
"Continuation of standard public morality laws with identical thresholds."
Detailed Analysis
292
Section Data Pending
294
Section Data Pending
Legal Implications
Practical Scenarios
"Selling pornographic cards or prints near a school (BNS 294)."
"Singing vulgar and sexually explicit songs in a public transport bus (BNS 296)."
Expert Q&A
Has the definition of obscene changed in BNS?
No, the BNS uses the same language as the IPC, defining an object as obscene if it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest.
What is the legal test for obscenity under Section 292/BNS 294?
Historically, the Hicklin Test (tendency to deprave and corrupt). India modified this in Ranjit Udeshi (1965) — courts now consider the overall effect of material and whether it has any redeeming social value. Modern courts apply a 'community standards' test balanced against the work's literary/artistic merit.
Are artistic works protected from Section 292/BNS 294?
Yes — Section 292 has an explicit exception for works proved to be for the public good in the interest of science, literature, art, or learning. Courts assess whether genuine artistic merit outweighs potentially obscene elements.
Does Section 292/BNS 294 apply to online content?
Yes — combined with IT Act Section 67 (publishing obscene electronic material — up to 3 years first offence, 5 years subsequent). Both IPC/BNS obscenity provisions and IT Act provisions can be charged simultaneously for online obscene content.
Deepen Your Legal Knowledge
Explore more side-by-side comparisons of the Indian Law reforms 2024. Detailed analysis for lawyers, students, and legal practitioners.
Explore All Comparisons