SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(SC) 1622

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Jagdish Singh Khehar, CJI., D.Y. Chandrachud, J.
Common Cause (A Regd. Society) – Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition (C) No. 387 of 2000, W.P.(C) Nos. 963 of 2013 & 1024 of 2013
Decided On : 12-01-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Ms. Kamini Jaiswal, Jatinderpal Singh, Prashant Bhushan, Rohit Kumar Singh, Govind Jee, T. Sudhakar, O. Kuttan, Rajeev K. Panday, Rajeev Maheshwaranand Roy, Advocates
For the Respondents:Yashank Adhyaru), Sr. Adv., Ms. Sunita Sharma, Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, D.L. Chidananda, B.K. Prasad, Advocates, A.K. Panda, Sr. Adv., Ms. Sunita Sharma, Ms. Kiran Bhardwaj, G.S. Makker, Advpcates, Anup J. Bhambhani, Sr. Adv., Ms. Sumita Hazarika, Ms. Ipsita Behura, Advocates, Mohit D. Ram), Ms. Monisha Handa, K.V. Vishwanathan, Sr. Adv., Nikhil Nayyar, N. Sai, Ms. Smriti Shah, Divyanshu Rai, Nitin Sharma, Advocates, Ms. Avni Singh, Advocate, G. Prakash, Jishnu M.L., Ms. Priyanka Prakash, Ms. Beena Prakash, manu Srinath, Advocates, Abhishek Malhotra, Ms. Aahna Mehrotra, Ms. Liz Mathew, Rijul Taneja, P. Parmeswaran, Advocates

The main legal point established in the judgment is the existence of an adequate complaint redressal mechanism for television and radio programmes under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, and the recommendation for formalizing such a mechanism under Section 22 of the Act.

Headnote:

Complaint Redressal Mechanism - Television and Radio Programmes - Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, Rule 6 - The court discussed the provisions of Rule 6 of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, which sets out the Programme Code for cable services, and the existing self-regulatory and governmental mechanisms for addressing complaints against television and radio programmes. The court recommended the formalization of a complaint redressal mechanism under Section 22 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, and similar rules for radio programmes.

Fact of the Case:

The primary issue in the case pertained to the introduction of a complaint redressal mechanism for complaints against television and radio programmes, specifically with reference to the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, and the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was an existing self-regulatory and governmental mechanism for addressing complaints against television and radio programmes. However, it noted that the mechanism was not known to the general public and directed the Union of India to publish the mechanism for adequate public awareness. The court also recommended the formalization of a complaint redressal mechanism under Section 22 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, and similar rules for radio programmes.

Issues: The issues involved the existence and adequacy of the complaint redressal mechanism for television and radio programmes, the interpretation of Rule 6 of the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994, and the consideration of media rights under Article 19 of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the finding of an existing mechanism for addressing complaints against television and radio programmes, the need for public awareness of the mechanism, and the recommendation for formalizing a complaint redressal mechanism under Section 22 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, and similar rules for radio programmes.

Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Union of India to publish the existing mechanism for addressing complaints against television and radio programmes and a recommendation for formalizing a complaint redressal mechanism under Section 22 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, and similar rules for radio programmes.

ORDER :

WP(C)No.387/2000 :

On the cause of action, which arises for consideration in this bunch of cases, the petitioner in the first instance filed Writ Petition (C)No.387/2000. Thereafter some other petitions were also filed. The factual and legal position depicted in the original writ petition and in the other connected writ petitions, we are informed, stand incorporated and upgraded in Writ Petition (C) No.1024 of 2013. In view of the above, Writ Petition (C) No.387/2000 and the other connected writ petitions referred to above are hereby disposed of summarily.

2. We take up Writ petition (C) No.1024/2013 for consideration, on merits.

WP(C) No. 1024/2013 :

3. The primary issue, which arises for consideration in the instant case, is with reference to the introduction of a complaint redressal mechanism. Such a mechanism is sought in respect of complaints made against television and radio programmes. Illustratively, our attention has been drawn to the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, and to the rules framed there under, namely, Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994. We may illustratively refer to Rule 6, which is extracted hereunder :

"6. Programme Code. - (1) No programme should be carried in the cable service which:-

(a) offends against good taste or decency;

(b) contains criticism of friendly countries;

(c) contains attack on religions or communities or visuals or words contemptuous of religious groups or which promote communal attitudes;

(d) contains anything obscene, defamatory, deliberate, false and suggestive innuendos and half truths;

(e) is likely to encourage or incite violence or contains anything against maintenance of law and order or which promote-anti-national attitudes;

(f) contains anything amounting to contempt of court;

(g) contains aspersions against the integrity of the President and Judiciary;

(h) contains anything affecting the integrity of the Nation;

(i) criticises, maligns or slanders any individual in person or certain groups, segments of social, public and moral life of the country;

(j) encourages superstition or blind belief;

(k) denigrates women through the depiction in any manner of the figure of a women, her form or body or any part thereof in such a way as to have the effect of being indecent, or derogatory to women, or is likely to deprave, corrupt or injure the public morality or morals;

(l) denigrates children;

(m) contains visuals or words which reflect a slandering, ironical and snobbish attitude in the portrayal of certain ethnic, linguistic and regional groups;

(n) contravenes the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952;

(o) is not suitable for unrestricted public exhibition.

Provided that no film or film song or film promo or film trailer or music video or music albums or their promos, whether produced in India or abroad, shall be carried through cable service unless it has been certified by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC)) as suitable for unrestricted public exhibition in India.

Explanation - For the purpose of this clause, the expression "unrestricted public exhibition" shall have the same meaning as assigned to it in the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (37 of 1952);

(2) The cable operator should strive to carry programmes in his cable service which project women in a positive, leadership role of sobriety, moral and character building qualities.

(3) No cable operator shall carry or include in his cable service any programme in respect of which copyright subsists under the Copyright Act, 1957 (14 of 1957) unless he has been granted a licence by owners of copyright under that Act in respect of such programme.

(4) Care should be taken to ensure that programmes meant for children do not contain any bad language or explicit scenes of violence.

(5) Programmes unsuitable for children must not be carried in the cable service at times when the largest numbers of children are viewing.

(6) No cable operator shall carry or include in his cable service any television broadcast or channel, which has

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top