124 either description for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees. In this present case this court finds that this accused had transmitted and published the obscene materials (being the nude video of the victim) in the internet from his mobile phone and hence this court is of the view that the prosecution has proved the offence u/s 67 Information Technology Act beyond the shadow of all reasonable doubts. Section 67 A of the Information Technology Act states Punishment for publishing or transmitting of material of material containing sexually explicit act etc. in electronic form Whoever publishes or transmits or causes to be published or transmitted in the electronic form any material which contains sexually explicit act or conduct shall be punished on first conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to five years and with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees and in the event of second or subsequent conviction with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and also with fine which may extend to ten lakh rupees. In this present case the videos that were uploaded by the accused contained sexually explicit acts of P.W. 1 and CFSL reports also stated about the nature of the video and those videos belong to the victim P.W. 1 and from the mobile phone of the accused those videos had been uploaded by the accused had been established and hence this court is of the view that the prosecution has proved the offence u/s 67 A Information Technology Act beyond the shadow of all reasonable doubts. Thus the citation as referred by the Ld. Lawyer for the accused at the time of argument in (2017) 2 Supreme Court Cases 18 is not applicable in this case. So, considering the evidences, the exhibits and material exhibits from the side of the prosecution, considering the arguments from both sides and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the cogent, clear, consistent and reliable evidences from the side of the prosecution and the statement of the accused u/s 313 Cr. PC which appears to be motivated and purposive this court holds that the prosecution has proved the offences u/s 354A/354C/354D/509 of