According to Lord Brougham is to take the exact meaning of the words which the legislature have given them,

and to take
the meaning which the words given naturally imply, unless where the construction of those words is either by the preamble
or by the context of the words in question, controlled or altered
the substantial discussion was regarding obscenity and its meaning. Even though it is not defined anywhere in Indian Penal Code it is made punishable under Section 292.
The appellant contended that work of art is not necessarily obscene if it treats with sex even with nudity and should be viewed as a whole, and its artistic or literary merits
should be weighed against the so-called obscenity, the context in which the obscenity occurs and the purpose it seeks to serve. Further, the test adopted by High Court and
lower court in order to identify whether the book was obscene or not was based on Queeen V. Hicklin9. Which we will discuss later in the article.
The court discussed the meaning of obscenity and in their consideration, it meant offensive to modesty or decency; lewd, filthy and repulsive. It is crucial to note that the word
obscene is vague, by itself, and was defined by other vague words such as modesty, decency, lewd, filthy or repulsive. Contrastingly, the apex court considered the word
obscene as not vague.
The ambiguity or uncertainty of the definition of obscenity can be established from the fact that the sense of understanding of the apex court judges regarding obscenity
seemed to derive from a certain Colonial morality and knowledge production. The Supreme Court established that a book on medical science which contains numerous
intimate illustrations and photographs is not obscene but in a sense immodest.
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=HQKvDR96cm0
https://cometowardssuccess896449135.wordpress.com/2022/02/17/legal-maxim-expressio-unius-est-exclusio-alterius-ex
press-mention-of-one-thing-implies-exclusion-of-others/
https://
www.la
wordo.c
om/lega
l-fiction/
#google
_vignett
e