Order: The Sub-Inspector of Police Huvinahadagalli charge-sheeted one H. Obedulla, aged about 26 years, an Octroi peon, alleging that he had contravened the provisions of clauses (o) and (r) of section 92 of the Mysore Police Act of 1963. 2. The allegation against him was that on 21st January, 1974 at about 5 p.m., the accused used indecent language against one Vasudevappa, Clerk in the Town Municipal Office at Hadagalli, in a public place (Municipal Office), and behaved indecently and in a disorderly manner and used insulting words against Vasudevappa. 3. The accused was heard and tried by the Munsiff and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hadagalli. The accused (petitioner) was convicted as charged and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.50 and, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for five days. 4. Section 95 of the Indian Penal Code, reads as follows: “Nothing is an offence by reason that it causes or that it is intended to cause or that it is known to be likely to cause, any harm, if that harm is so slight that no person of ordinary sense and temper would complain such harm.” 5. In the spirit of the above section the Police ought not to have laid the charge-sheet against the petitioner and the Court below ought not to have convicted and sentenced him. Using of indecent language has become a part of the present behaviour. The dividing line between what is decent and what is indecent is absolutely thin. 6. The order of conviction and sentence passed by the Magistrate is set aside, and no second thought is needed. This Revision Petition is allowed.