[LIVE UPDATES] SC Hearing On Plea Against Sudarshan TV's 'UPSC Jihad' Show

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

18 Sept 2020 12:05 PM IST

  • [LIVE UPDATES] SC Hearing On Plea Against Sudarshan TVs UPSC Jihad Show

    ...

    Live Updates

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:15 PM IST

      Divan: There is a post broadcast machinery that is robust enough. If someone feels that there is an element of defamation or untruth and they may approach the Court. We have sufficient checks and balances. 

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:14 PM IST

      Divan: When we have the advantage of four programmes and the explanation on affidavit, then it enters the realm of permissible speech. 

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:13 PM IST

      Divan: In this internet age when there is no restriction on Netflix etc, then this ban would just be anachronistic. That is essentially the submission having regard to Articles 19(1)(a), 21 and 14.

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:12 PM IST

      Divan: On prior restraint, there is now law. Even with regard to Pre-censorship with respect to cinematography, I was told that there is a petition still pending and is under challenge.

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:11 PM IST

      Divan: In my 15 years of running, it is not necessary for everyone to like what is being projected by a news channel. The fact that some news may make some people uncomfortable is the cornerstone of a democracy.

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:11 PM IST

      Divan: With respect to reasonable restrictions, there is nothing in our law which allows for prior restraint till date. My third point is that the SC must not urge Pre-broadcast directions as that would let HCs to do the same.

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:09 PM IST

      Divan: This is the consistent format under Article 19(1)(a) and here I come to my next point. As far as my freedom of speech and prior restraint is concerned, that is not employed in context of TV broadcast.

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:01 PM IST

      Divan now refers to the 2018 case of the Supreme Court titled Common Cause v. Union of India, which was authored by Justice Chandrachud itself. 

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:01 PM IST

      Divan: It wouldn’t have served public interest had the episodes been banned. This is fact-based. All these issues; the terror-funding, foreign funding, notion of delimitation and whether there ought to be further debate, these are things which the public is entitled to know.

    • 18 Sept 2020 1:00 PM IST

      Divan: I wish to engage the Court on the thought of whether there was a Pre-publication ban and the first four episodes weren’t aired to the public.

      SG asks Divan to pause as the Bench tries to find whether the material is on record.

    Next Story