Justice Joseph: 14 categories which could invite the Government's intervention under Rules of the Act.
For example under "i"
"Criticise, slander an individual"
Now slander and criticism of an individual takes place daily....
Justice Joseph: The words used is "May" under the Act - ie. where there is violation of program code and that the officers must be satisfied that the code has been violated.
Farasat: I see the court's concern on the slippery slope but if your lordships do it in a tight-roped manner.
Justice Joseph: Please see "Terms of power" of the Section 19 & 20 under the Cable TV Act.
Farasat: Under Article 19(2), words used are "morality".
Morality means "constitutional morality".
Articles 14 & 21 are the most obvious representations of constitutional morality. SC thus can pass an order restricting it.
"Postponement order not a punitive measure but a preventive measure," says Farasat, justifying the restraining order of the SC on Sudarshan TV telecast on show with tagline UPSC Jihad.
Farasat: I say that the telecasting of the show by Sudarshannewstv directly negates Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India.
Farasat reads out a judgment to suggest that the right to postpone telecasting a show and passing restraining orders is valid under Constitution of India.
"Test is - publication - must create real prejudice in the administration of justice"
Justice Joseph: How SC has jurisdiction under 32?
Farasat: Although power has been located in Article 129, the considerations on which the right is located is in terms of Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution. Now I seek to canvas how this emanates from Articles 32 & 226.
The content itself is dangerous irrespective of the timing, Farasat submits saying that a 'postponement order' as regards broadcast is meaningless in the case of Sudarshan TV and that the injunction needs to be made permanent.
Farasat: Prior restraint in indian constitutional law is allowed, but I m on the issue of restraint on further broadcast.