In a major relief to Malayalam magazine Grihalakshmi, the Kerala High Court has dismissed the petition filed against it by a complainant. In its ruling, the bench said that despite their best efforts, they failed to see anything obscene about the photoshoot, which had the state divided.

In the March issue of the Grihalakshmi magazine, prominent Malayali poetess and writer Gilu Joseph had posed breastfeeding a child on the magazine’s cover. Although the move was largely hailed as a much-needed step towards destigmatising breastfeeding, some sections of the society were offended by the bold photoshoot.

It sparked a controversy in the state, which led to a case being filed against the magazine at the Court of Judicial Magistrate in Kollam by advocate Vinod Mathew against the publishers and Joseph. The petition was filed by one Mr. Felix MA and focused on the “obscene” nature of the photograph used for the cover and the supposedly demeaning caption, which was anti men.

As per the petition, the magazine cover had violated provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Rules and Section 45 of the Juvenile Justice Act. Mr. Felix had also invoked provisions of Indecent Representation of Women Act of 1986 and Article 39 (e) and (f) of the Indian constitution.

But the Kerala HC has refused to term the breastfeeding cover as obscene. In response to the petition, the court noted that morals were an elusive concept and that “one man’s vulgarity is another man’s lyric,” broadly implying that it was just a case of jaundice eyes.

Livelaw.in reported that the bench comprising Chief Justice Antony Dominic and Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu pointed out that they failed to see anything obscene about the picture, despite their best efforts. Neither was there anything objectionable in the caption for men, as it was alleged in the petition. “We looked at the picture with the same eyes we look at the paintings of artists like Raja Ravi Varma. As the beauty lie in the beholder’s eye, so does obscenity perhaps.”

They also noted that the sections charged by the petitioner Felix didn’t apply o the magazine, because nothing about the picture altered the “the society’s moral fabric.”

Another advocate, Jiyas Jamal from Aluva, Kerala had also filed a petition against the model, the magazine and the parents of the child who was featured on the cover. The compliant states that the model who was not lactating had “stuffed” her breast into the child’s mouth just for the photoshoot. And in doing so, all the three parties have disregarded the child’s health and its rights have been exploited.

The primary contention of the petition is that the child was used for commercial purpose, putting the “rights of the newborn babies in danger.” The petition alleged that the cover “tricked the baby into thinking if the model is its mother and that it will get milk."

(The above story first appeared on LatestLY on Jun 21, 2018 04:31 PM IST. For more news and updates on politics, world, sports, entertainment and lifestyle, log on to our website latestly.com).