VERDICTUM.IN NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023/DHC/001676 through the contents of the alleged webseries namely “College Romance”, particularly Episode no. 5 of series 01. It is admitted fact of all the parties that there are various obscene language throughout the episode and the same is not in denial, but merely abusive language may not amount to obscenity as per judgments relied upon by the parties. At present, the role of the Court, while dealing with the revision petitions, is confined to the correctness, illegality and impropriety of the impugned order…” 9. From the perusal of the above judgment, it is evident that both the Sections cannot be invoked at the same time. Scientifically, the content was only shown in the internet media and the prosecution has not stated anywhere that there was any other visual representation beyond the internet. Hence, the arguments of ld. Counsels for the revisionists in this regard to the extent that Sections u/s 292 and 294 IPC cannot exist together with Section 67A IT Act, if the content is only confined to the digital media, are acceptable. Rest of the arguments referred to the defining of whole content, is not permissible in the revisional jurisdiction as that can be done only after the collection of evidence in this regard and a final finding cannot be made while dealing with the revisional jurisdiction. Hence, the impugned order passed by ld. ACMM is modified to the extent that FIR be registered only u/s 67A of Information & Technology Act and rest of the Sections related to IPC be dropped...” (Emphasis supplied) B. 12. SUBMISSIONS AT THE BAR Learned senior counsel for the petitioners argued that the impugned orders suffer from illegality and are liable to be quashed since there is non-compliance of Section 154(3) of Cr.P.C. and therefore, non-compliance of the same will come in the way of CRL.M.C. 2214/2020 & connected matters Page 8 of 41