INDECENT REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1986: A LEGAL ANALYSIS

ABSTRACT

The Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, was enacted to curb the portrayal of women in an indecent or derogatory manner across various forms of media. The Act aims to uphold the dignity and modesty of women by restricting obscenity and objectification in both public and private spaces. This article is a comprehensive analysis of the Act, tracing its historical background, legal provisions, and its interrelation with constitutional mandates, previous and current criminal laws, and judicial interpretations. Landmark judgments and significant case laws are also discussed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Act and the challenges it has faced in its implementation. The study also considers necessary amendments and recommendations for adapting the law to contemporary media and technological advancements.

The Act is primarily to maintain women’s dignity and protect them from objectification and exploitation. In this article, the historical background, provisions, and relevance of the Act will be discussed, along with the constitutional basis and its connection to the previous and new criminal laws and its impact through judicial precedents. Moreover, the necessity of amendments according to digital growth and changing norms in society has been discussed further in the paper.

INTRODUCTION

Indecent representation of women has always been a highly contentious issue in Indian society and deeply rooted in cultural, legal, and moral discourses. Objectification and commodification of women have accelerated due to rapid progress in print, electronic, and digital media. The Government of India recognized the growing concern by enacting the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 (IRWA, 1986), intended to prohibit any representation of women that is obscene, derogatory, or likely to corrupt public morality.

This legislation came following growing public anxiety over how women were depicted, reinforcing stereotyping and stripping their dignity. Evolution of women’s dignity in the law is as a result of several legal provisions, from constitutional provisions, international commitments, to other criminal legislations. The article aims at providing comprehensive details on IRWA, 1986, as it finds application in current times, owing to the upsurge of digital communication and media portrayal.

The portrayal of women in the media has been a topic of debate in society for a long time. Objectification, stereotyping, and the perpetuation of harmful gender roles were some of the reasons behind the enactment of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986. This Act is a significant step towards protecting the dignity of women and promoting gender equality. This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the Act, examining its various facets and evaluating its impact on society.

KEYWORDS: Indecent Representation, Women’s Rights, Media Regulations, Constitutional Provisions, Criminal Law, Gender Equality, Case Laws, Digital Media, Objectification, Legal Framework, Women, Prohibition, Media, Objectification, Constitutional Validity, Case Laws, Freedom of Speech.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Indecent representation of women was something that was held to be specifically beyond the cover of existing law before the passage of the 1986 Act. There were increasing concerns that degrading representation in the media was harming the rights of women, and such concerns were brought to the legislative forum to draft specific legislation for this issue. The Act therefore became a measure of redress for such demands.

It was only after the IRWA was enacted that the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Obscene Publications Act, 1927 became the mainstay of law to speak about obscenity. These provisions, however, were held to be inadequate to deal with the mounting exploitation of women through advertisements, cinema, literature, and print media. Late 20th century was marked with significant feminist activism over strong legal recourse to de-clothe and objectify women in media.

The Committee on the Status of Women in India (CSWI), in its 1974 report, brought to the fore the adverse effects of such representations and recommended legislative intervention. In the 1980s, growing concerns about the increasing sexualisation of women in public imagery led to the drafting of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Bill, 1986, which was subsequently passed into law.

This is a long-persisting problem in India-the indecent portrayal of women. The necessity for an exclusive law was identified because of the growing obscenity in media. As such, there arises the question of advertisements and cinema. Before this Act, the main laws governing obscenity were as follows:

• Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860: Sections 292, 293, and 294 deal with literature, art, and public places.
• Cinematograph Act, 1952: It deals with the licensing of films and prohibits screening of obscene films.
• Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867: It deals with the regulation of printing and press, and prohibits any obscene material.
• Young Persons (Harmful Publications) Act, 1956: Controls publications harmful to young minds.

Since the laws above failed to provide specific regulations for the indecent representation of women, the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 was enacted.

KEYNOTES ON THE ACT

• Objective: To prohibit the indecent representation of women through advertisements, publications, writings, paintings, and other media.
• Scope: Covers all forms of print, electronic, and digital media.
• Penal Provisions: Prescribes imprisonment and fines for violations.
• Enforcement Authority: Law enforcement agencies, including police officials and magistrates, are empowered to implement the Act.
• Connection with Other Laws: Works alongside IPC provisions, the IT Act, and constitutional rights.
• It is mainly concerned with the obscene depiction of women in different mediums.
• It was enacted in 1986 at a time when the objectification and derogatory portrayal of women in advertisements and publications was the highest.
• It is supplementary to constitutional provisions for gender equality and dignity.
• It is closely associated with criminal law provisions on obscenity and rights of women.
• Several judicial precedents have helped in interpreting and enforcing the Act.
• The internet has made it difficult to enforce the Act effectively.
• Act specifically prohibits indecent representation of women in advertisements, publications, and other media.
• Defines “indecent representation” in very general terms, which would include any depiction degrading or dehumanizing women.
• Provides for penalties for committing a violation, which includes imprisonment and fines.
• It has been amended and interpreted through various judicial pronouncements that have shaped its practical application.
• Effectiveness of the Act is disputed that questions its scope and implementation.

SECTION-WISE EXPLANATION TO THE ACT

• Section 1: Short Title, Extent, and Commencement

Gives the name of the Act with applicability all over India

This section gives the title of the Act and states that it extends all over the country and also specifies the date of its commencement.

• Section 2: Definitions

Indecent Representation of Women: Defined as the depiction of a woman’s form in a manner that is obscene, derogatory, or likely to corrupt public morality.

Advertisement: Includes any document, notice, circular, label, wrapper, or broadcast intended to promote goods or services.

Publication: Covers any printed, written, visual, or electronic material.

• Section 3: Prohibition of Advertisements Containing Indecent Representation of Women

This chapter prohibits advertisements showing women indecently. Persons engaged in publishing, circulating or distributing such advertisements are liable for prosecution.

• Section 4: Prohibition of Publication or Sending of Material Containing Indecent Representation of Women

This section prohibits the publication or dispatch of any book, pamphlet, writing, painting, film or other written material that contains an indecent representation of women.

• Section 5: Powers to Enter and Search Premises

Empowers designated officers to enter, search, and seize any material suspected of violating the Act.

• Section 6: Penalties

Provides for imprisonment and fines for individuals and entities violating the Act.

• First-time offenders: Imprisonment up to two years and a fine up to ₹2,000.
• Repeat offenders: Imprisonment up to five years and a fine up to ₹10,000.

• Section 7: Offences by Companies

Holds companies liable for offenses committed by their employees unless the company demonstrates that it took due care to prevent the offense.

• Section 8: Taking Cognizance of Offences

Declares that no court shall take cognizance of an offence under this Act except upon a complaint made by the authorized officer.

• Section 9: Protection of Action Taken in Good Faith

Accords immunity to the government officers taking action in good faith in making an attempt to enforce the Act.

• Section 10: Enabling Power to Make Rules

It confers powers to the central government to frame rules for the effective implementation of the Act.

JUDICIAL EXPLANATION AND LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS

Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal (2014)

• Held that mere nudity is not obscene until it undermines moral standards.
• The Supreme Court rejected the archaic Hicklin test and applied the community standards test

Ranjit Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (1965)

• Convicted a bookseller for selling an obscene book.
• Introduced the Hicklin test, which was later amended in subsequent cases.

Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon (1996)

• Relaxed the censorship on the movie “Bandit Queen,” citing that real life incidents cannot be treated as obscene.

Sujata Patil v. State of Maharashtra (2018)

• Observed that the internet regulations and censorship would control indecent representation of women on the internet.

RELATIONS WITH INDIAN CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AND THE ACT:

The Act is considerably integrated with various rights given in the Indian Constitution.

• Article 14 of the Indian Constitution seeks to include equality before the law;
• Article 15 prohibits any discrimination on grounds of sex; and
• Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. Therefore, the constitutional matrix for legislation to protect the dignity of women is provided by these very three articles of the Indian Constitution. However, this Act also concurrently overlaps with
• Article 19(1)(a) (free speech and expression), which would raise complex issues of balancing the right to free speech with that of protecting rights of women.

CONNECTION WITH CRIMINAL LAW (OLD AND NEW)

Indian Penal Code, 1860

The IRWA, 1986, complements the following provisions of the IPC:

• Section 292: Prohibits the sale, distribution, and exhibition of obscene materials.
• Section 293: Criminalizes the sale of obscene materials to minors.
• Section 294: Punishes obscene acts in public places.
• Section 509: Any word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman.

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

The new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 has replaced IPC and similar provisions in it remain:

• Section 294 (earlier IPC Section 292): Obscenity in media and advertisements
• Section 295 (earlier IPC Section 293): Sale of obscene materials to minors
• Section 296 (earlier IPC Section 294): Obscene public acts.
• Section 79 (earlier IPC Section 509): Deals with sexual harassment and indecent eye contact towards women.

LIMITATIONS AND CHALLENGES:

• Enforcement: Implementation of the Act is difficult in practice because enforcement is not adequately done due to limited resources and procedural complexities; proving intent may also be tough.
• Definition of “Indecent Representation”: The broad definition of “indecent representation” can lead to subjective interpretations and potential misuse.
• Freedom of Speech: Balancing the protection of women’s dignity with the constitutional right to freedom of speech requires careful consideration.
• New Media: The rapid growth of online platforms and social media presents new challenges for regulating indecent representation.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

• Strengthening Enforcement: The law enforcement agencies require increased resources and training to enforce the Act.
• Clarifying Definitions: Definition of “indecent representation” needs to be made clearer to avoid ambiguity and misuse.
• Online Content: Specific guidelines and mechanisms are required to address the challenges posed by indecent representation in online media.
• Promoting Public Awareness: Public awareness campaigns can help educate citizens about the harmful effects of indecent representation and encourage reporting of violations.

CONCLUSION

The IRWA, 1986, is still an important legal tool for protecting the dignity of women. However, the digital era has thrown new challenges that this Act was not originally designed to face. The ubiquitous use of social media, online advertisements, and deep-fake technology has led to the unregulated circulation of obscene and derogatory representations of women. While other enactments such as the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, have supplemented the IRWA, there is an urgent need to amend the Act to explicitly include digital content and enhance penalties for online violations. Enforcement is another significant issue. The authorities must be well-trained, and public awareness programs should be undertaken to make people aware of their rights and legal remedies. The approach should be balanced so that freedom of expression is not unnecessarily curtailed while effectively preventing the objectification of women in media.

REFERENCES

1. Indian Penal Code, 1860
2. Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986
3. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
4. Information Technology Act, 2000
5. Aveek Sarkar v. State of West Bengal, (2014) 4 SCC 257
6. Ranjit Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1965 SC 881
7. Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon, (1996) 4 SCC 1
8. Sujata Patil v. State of Maharashtra, 2018 SCC Online Bom 1081