Strictly Follow Program Code : Karnataka HC Directs Media On PIL Filed After Ramesh Jarkiholi Scandal

The Karnataka High Court has passed an interim order directing TV news channels to strictly follow the ''Programme Code' defined under Section 5 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 ('Act' for short) read with Rule 6 of the Cable Television Network Rules, 1994.

The order was passed by a single bench on March 6 on a PIL filed by an advocate affiliated to the Bharatiya Janata Party(BJP) in the wake of the sex CD scandal which led to the resignation of State Minister Ramesh Jarkiholi.

The direction was issued by the court while hearing a petition filed by Advocate Arma V Hiremath, an active member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, who has served in the legal cell of the said party.

"By an ad-interim direction, it is directed that any broadcast in the Cable Television Network shall be strictly in conformity in terms of 'Programme code' as defined under Section 5 of theCable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 ('Act' for short) read with Rule 6 of the Cable Television Network Rules,1994",  a single bench of Justice PS Dinesh Kumar ordered in the petition which lists 70 media outlets, including newspapers, as respondents.

The petitioner sought directions to the Union of India and the State government to implement the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Justice K S Puttaswamy Vs Union of India in its letter and spirit safeguarding the right to privacy under Article 21 of Constitution. The petitioner also sought directions against the Commissioner of Police to take action against such respondent media platforms, who are in violation of the programme code as mentioned in rule 6 of the Cable Television Network rules.

Citing the instance of telecast by media houses based upon the release of the contents of a CD allegedly containing visuals of Jarkiholi in a compromising position with a woman, it was said that such broadcast tantamounts to extreme violation of privacy of the aforesaid individual.

The petitioner has claimed that he is espousing his private right as he apprehends that the respondent-media platforms may get in hold of explicit material of the petitioner by unknown sources, broadcast or publish the same in their platforms thereby infringe upon his right to privacy that is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. It is added that a petitioner who belongs to a particular political party is scared that he may be targeted by certain vested interests who would not think twice to invade his privacy and bring peril to his dignity and reputation.

The plea also states that programs, visuals telecasted by the respondents/broadcasters offend Rule 6, in as much as the programme in issue is not in good taste or decency, contains obscene, defamatory, deliberate false, suggestive innuendos and half truths which malign or slander individuals.

Following the interim order of the Court, the Bengaluru Police Commissioner on March 9 issued an order, prohibiting all broadcasts which are not strictly in conformity of terms of programme code as defined under section 5 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act read with rule 6 of the Cable Television Network rules. Any violation of the aforesaid direction shall be liable for prosecution under section 16 of the Act.