Ocular Evidence Prevails Over Medical Findings: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Despite Negative Semen Report & Police Lapses High Court Cannot Pass Inconsistent Orders: Supreme Court Quashes Demolition Order Passed Despite Earlier Restraint In CMDA Regularisation Dispute Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Open University Degrees Obtained Prior To 2017 Cut-Off Must Be A Polluter Before Being Held Absolutely Liable: Supreme Court Sets Aside NGT Order Against Art Of Living Over Yamuna Event, Orders ₹5 Cr Refund Father Cannot Be Deprived Of Minor's Custody Unless Proved Unfit: Allahabad High Court Hands Over 4-Yr-Old Child To Father, Sets Aside Trial Court Order Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Integral To Personal Liberty': Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail As 24 Witnesses Remain Unexamined No Specific Chemical Opinion That Seized Substance Was Ganja: Gujarat High Court Upholds Acquittal Under Section 2(iii)(b) NDPS Act Mere Pendency Of Criminal Cases Simplicitor No Ground For Externment': Karnataka High Court Quashes Raichur SDM Order Order VI Rule 16 CPC | Defendants Enjoy Greater Latitude In Altering Defence: Punjab & Haryana High Court Explains Doctrinal Leeway Under CPC Boarding Running Train Not Self-Inflicted Injury: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Order Denying Compensation Possession Of One Co-Sharer Is Possession Of All: J&K&L High Court Cannot Invoke Article 226 For Registering FIR Or Restoring Water Supply: Kerala High Court Natural Guardian's Sale Of Minor's Property Without Court Nod Is Voidable, Extinguishes If Not Challenged Within 3 Years Of Majority: Madras High Court Orissa High Court Rejects Cancer-Survivor Husband's Plea To Transfer Maintenance Case Presumption Of Correctness Of Judicial Records Not Absolute And Can Be Rebutted By Direct Evidence: Kerala High Court on Married Daughter Cannot Challenge Partition After 21-Year Slumber If She Had Knowledge: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala High Court Orders Immediate Suspension Of Lakshadweep CJM For Allegedly Forging Witness Deposition To Convict Accused

Goods Cannot be Deemed Obscene Based on Imaginative or Potential Misuse - Caresmith Wave Body Massagers Not Adult Sex Toys: Bombay High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Bombay High Court in a landmark judgment addressed the interpretation of ‘obscene’ under customs law and its applicability to imported goods. The court emphasized that the classification of imported items as ‘obscene’, particularly in the context of ‘Caresmith Wave Body Massagers’, should not rely on subjective perceptions or imaginative potential uses.

The issue revolved around the import of “Caresmith Wave Body Massagers,” which the Commissioner of Customs, NS-V classified as prohibited ‘Adult Sex Toys’ under Customs Notification No. 01/1964-Customs. This decision was based on the Commissioner’s perception that these massagers could potentially be used as sex toys. The case raised questions about the application of obscenity definitions under the Customs Act and the Indian Penal Code.

Objective Standards vs. Subjective Perceptions: The Court critiqued the subjective approach taken by the Commissioner. Justice G.S. Kulkarni noted, “Firstly, it was clearly the figment of the Commissioner’s imagination and/or his personal perception that the goods are prohibited items.”

Interpretation of Obscenity under Customs Law: The Court highlighted the need for an objective interpretation. “Any perverse application of law would fall foul of the rules of legitimacy and fairness expected from a quasi-judicial authority,” the Court observed.

Applicability of Customs Notification and IPC: The Court found that the Commissioner’s interpretation, influenced by personal views and not legal standards, failed to appropriately apply the customs notification and IPC provisions.

Decision: The High Court overturned the decision of the Commissioner of Customs, allowing the import of ‘Caresmith Wave Body Massagers’ and ruling them not to be ‘obscene articles’ under the relevant customs and penal provisions. The Court directed customs authorities to adhere to legal definitions and objective standards in determining the obscenity of imported goods.

Date of Decision: 20 March 2024.

Commissioner of Customs NS-V vs. Doc Brown Industries LLP,

Latest Legal News