VERDICTUM.IN NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2023/DHC/001676 41. In the name of individual freedom, such language cannot be permitted to be served to the general public and be represented to the world at large as if this is the language that this country and youth in educational institutions speaks. Holding so, will amount to a dangerous trend and will be against public interest. The individualistic choices, essentially in case they are of using such language, which remain in individualistic domain will not attract criminality and will not infringe the said person’s individual freedom. However, in the name of individual freedom, neither such language can be permitted to be served to all without classification and be represented to the world at large as the spoken language of this country, nor it can be permitted that the youth of this country be told that this language is the latest accepted normal behavior. 42. Sexual explicitness depends from case to case and the content being judged in light of the audience it caters to. The petition before this Court essentially highlighted a significant concern due to increase in easy proliferation and easy access to such language by impressionable minds. This Court notes, after hearing the content of the web series, that the concern of the complainant was not devoid of merit. While balancing observations with the fundamental rights prescribed under the Constitution of India, the obscenity depicted in the web series has no cogent justification in the name of being the new language of the youth and accepted by the masses. The approach of this Court for applying the test of a common man and how the content will affect him and what his reaction will be, has to be in the Indian context as the Indian morality and values can only be judged CRL.M.C. 2214/2020 & connected matters Page 21 of 41