The court also said that parameters regarding pornography have to be decided and it has already held in other cases that freedom of speech and expression as envisaged under article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution is not "absolute" and is subject to reasonable restrictions.
Observing that the nation cannot afford to carry on experiments on children in the name of liberty or freedom of speech and expression, the Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to suggest ways to ban child pornography in all forms in the country.
The court also said that parameters regarding pornography have to be decided and it has already held in other cases that freedom of speech and expression as envisaged under article 19 (1)(a) of the Constitution is not "absolute" and is subject to reasonable restrictions.
"The Centre shall file an affidavit to suggest ways and means to curb child pornography. Innocent children can't be made prey to this kind of painful situation and a nation cannot afford to carry on any experiment on children in the name of liberty or for that matter freedom of speech and expression," a bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singhsaid.
There is a need to draw a distinct line between art and obscenity. The child pornography cannot be justified in the name of freedom of speech and expression, the bench said.
"You have to draw a line what can be viewed in public and what can be viewed in private," the bench said.
Referring to the picture of Monalisa and the perception of people, the bench said, "Pornography is a very difficult topic. Some people will find the picture of Monalisa as obscene while some people will find it as an art. What can we do then?.
The court order came after Centre's counsel additional solicitor general Pinky Anand submitted that it is difficult to ban the pornographic websites as they do not fall under any country's jurisdiction.
It asked the Centre to seek advice from the experts and suggestions from the National Commission for Women (NCW) on banning of websites dealing with adult and child pornography.
The senior lawyer said that agencies like Interpol and the CBI are taking necessary steps to block sites which specifically deal in child pornography.
"It is possible to ban child pornography but it is not possible to ban pornographic websites as they are not under any country's juridiction," Pinky Anand said.
Vijay Panjwani, appearing for the petitioner, said that watching and compelling anyone to watch pornographic materials in public places should be strictly banned.
The court order came on PIL seeking direction to the government and the enforcement agencies to block the pornography websites, platforms, links, or downloading by whatever other Internet means or name in order to prevent easy access whether in private or public.
It also sought to take strict measures to prevent distribution and access to pornography. The government to adopt various measures towards improvement in the effectiveness of blocking Child pornography on the Internet and to eliminate child pornography.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "Supreme Court")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}