Thread by @barandbench

Delhi HC begins hearing Mehul Choksi's appeal against the dismissal of his writ petition seeking pre-screening of Bad Boy Billionaires.

#BadBoyBillionaires

@NetflixIndia

#Netflix #MehulChoksi

Appeal listed before Chief Justice DN Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan.

Netflix India has filed it's reply. UOI has filed a short reply. There's no response from Netflix Inc: Adv Namit Joshi for Choksi.

@NetflixIndia

You don't want to file anything else?: Court asks Adv Vijay Aggarwal, counsel for Choksi

No, matter is ripe for hearing : Aggarwal

My prayer is that the matter remanded back. I'm on the question of maintainability of my writ petition. I want a re-match before the Single Judge: Aggarwal

Has your client joined any investigation?: Court

Yes, through video conferencing. He has been chargesheeted in some. Investigation in some: Aggarwal

There a High Court order staying summons issued to him in four cases: Aggarwal

For Art 226, your conduct is important. You are not a citizen anymore. Your basic case is that there has to be a fair trial. But for that there has to be trial. You are sitting in Antigua: Court

Why not pursue civil remedies as per the Single Judge's order: Court

I will show.. it takes away a right of mine : Aggarwal

I would like a determination by the Single Judge. The Single Judge's order is non-speaking : Aggarwal

Aggarwal reads the order passed by the Single Judge.

This order should go for being a non- speaking order. It is the duty of a sovereign to regulate content. Third, courts must interfere in case of infringement of fundamental rights : Aggarwal

What happened to the serial? : Court

There are others like me. Two of them filed petitions.. as of today, it has not been released: Aggarwal

Subrato Roy got an ex parte stay from a Bihar Court. Supreme Court asked me to go to HC. R Raju also got an ex parte stay. Matter is coming before Hyderabad HC tomorrow. Not releasing the series is a commerical decision. Plea in transfer Petition has been issued by SC: NK Kaul

Senior Adv Neeraj Kishan Kaul appears for Netflix.

Transfer Petition does not cover this proceeding: Kaul

Long and short of it is that the series has not been released: Aggarwal

What is the issue with filing a civil suit?: Court

It will be a wrong precedent. It is my fundamental right. It is an important question of law: Aggarwal

I showed a no of judgements. They were binding judgements. Ld Single Judge said that I am not dealing with this: Aggarwal

Order has to be speaking otherwise the appellate court cannot perform its functions: Aggarwal

The judgements that you cited were on maintainability nor merits?: Court

Maintainability: Aggarwal

Reasons are flesh and blood of a judicial order: Aggarwal reads a judgement.

Discretion is a science and it must be spelled out : Aggarwal

On the first day before the Single Judge, I relied upon the order passed in Batla House case. The convict sought a preview: Aggarwal

My prayer was only for a preview. I showed the Batla House order. My writ petition was maintainable : Aggarwal

Were the modifications in Batla House by consent? : Court

I appeared in Batla House. It was by consent: Kaul

Consent will come after preview. I'm still on preview: Aggarwal

There was a clearance from CBFC in that case. That case was different. There was an order by a public authority: Court

I'm only showing that such indulgence is not foreign. Scope of Art 226 is wide.. : Aggarwal

A PIL on regulating OTT platforms was disposed of. Court had said IT Act covered the issue: Aggarwal

They talk of hacking, pornography, tempering, cyber terrorism etc. These don't relate to Choksi's case: Aggarwal

Suppose Netflix says that only a particular religion can subscribe to it or it starts showing Chinese propoganda.. will Courts not interfere? We can stop tik tok and other Chinese apps but Netflix is above all?: Aggarwal

#Netflix @NetflixIndia

Let's point out any section in IT Act where I have an alternate remedy. I'll go under the IT Act. When I'm being tried and investigated in India.. whether I join or not.. investigation is going on. It is the duty of the sovereign to protect me: Aggarwal

My prayer for regulation of content on Netflix cannot be granted by a civil court: Aggarwal

The Division Bench judgement which was relied upon by the Single Judhe pertained to regulation of content on OTT platforms and it was held that the mischief was covered by IT Act: Aggarwal

IT Act does not deal with fundamental rights: Aggarwal

I'm defending people under IT Act everyday: Aggarwal as he refers to various chapters under IT Act

Let us also read it. We have to catch up to your superior knowledge: Court

Sec 69 also deals with investigation for any offence: Court

Offences are in Chapter 11. I am not covered: Aggarwal

I like to give remedy in criminal law if possible: Aggarwal

But you have an allergy to civil suit: Court

Aggarwal reads IT Act provisions.

Can there be a preview ? : Aggarwal as he reads Section 69 IT Act

Section 69 gives power to facilitate investigate : Aggarwal

I'm not covered under provisions which can block access : Aggarwal

There is no provision under IT Act which can block content which infringes fundamental rights: Aggarwal

Till IT Act says Sec 69A will be applicable to breach of fundamental rights, I will come to the courts: Aggarwal

On one side you say IT Act is your remedy but section 61 IT Act bars jurisdiction of civil court. I'm left without a remedy: Aggarwal

When I knock the doors of a constitutional court, it will not show me the door. A right is guaranteed to be in the same book which gave birth to this court : Aggarwal

Aggarwal reads judgements in his favour.

In the past, in writ jurisdiction, orders have been against Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. I can give a list : Aggarwal

The world is dynamic. With changing times law and understanding must evolve. They are generating 400 crores of revenue from India: Aggarwal

There must be judicial control on fast expanding maze of entities which impact rights of persons .. technicalities should not come in the way of relief under Art 226: Aggarwal reads a judgement.

Aggarwal summarises his arguments.

I've not argued on merits and facts: Aggarwal

Aggarwal reads a judgment on fair trial.

They can call me (Mehul Choksi) anything. This is it : Aggarwal

Let the single Judge decide the case on merit.. otherwise one of us will lose our chance to appeal: Aggarwal

Civil remedy is available to you. In a writ petition, the conduct of the petitioner is relevant: Court

Art 226 does not say that it is only for some and not for others: Aggarwal

There's no trial against you today: Court

Let the State make a statement that I'm not under investigation: Aggarwal

Today someone who wants a a fair trial and investigation, is his conduct consistent with this desire? : Court

Disputed question is whether I'm entitled to indulgence under Art 226. Infringement of my right is not disputed. I left India before FIR was registered: Aggarwal

When did you leave India? When did you renounce your citizenship?: Court

India is contesting my citizenship before an Antiguan Court. I have a heart condition. I had to go to Miami which is at least 24 hours from India : Aggarwal

These COVID times. I anyway can't travel. I am seeking joining of investigation through video conferencing: Aggarwal

Lalit Modi was granted relief by this Court: Aggarwal

Whether your conduct is consistent with your claim to fair trial?: Court

Aggarwal reads Jessica Lal judgement to show the importance of fair trial.

I left India on 4.1.2018 for medical treatment. On 15 Jan, I took oath of allegiance in Antigua. Mumbai Police gave an NOC that there are no cases pending against me: Aggarwal

You moved to New York first? In 11 days you swore allegiance to Antigua? What happened ?: Court

Reality is stranger than fiction. My heart treatment was in New York. Antigua and New York are four hours away: Aggarwal

I am complete medical record. There was no prelim enquiry against me. 30.01.2018 was the first FIR by CBI. Complaint was on 29.01.2018: Aggarwal

Till that day I was a good citizen.. Indian law presumes me to be innocent...All communications to me were responded to. Nirav Modi and Vijay Mallya can't challenge the Netflix show because they are declared fugitives: Aggarwal

Once you are declared a fugitive, all your civil rights are suspended. I have a stay order in my favour. I can't be declared a fugitive. I'm not a fugitive. My civil rights are there: Aggarwal

Single Judge did not go into such questions. Single Judge says that in view of Division Bench order, writ was not maintainable. Single Judge didn't even see my face. He didn't let me enter. So this court should also not see my face: Aggarwal

In Justice Swatantra Kumar case, this case stopped all reporting. It happened in Jindal case and then Shashi Tharoor case: Aggarwal

Those were defamation suits. HC granted relief for protection of Article 21: Aggarwal

Please see the conduct of Netflix also: Aggarwal

You are the person who approached the writ court: Court

Netflix is discharging public function. Their content is seen by millions of people : Aggarwal

Is this issue pending before Surpreme Court?: Court

I'm not aware. I plead ignorance: Aggarwal

Aggarwal concludes his arguments.

Senior Adv Kaul for Netflix begins.

@NetflixIndia

The entire writ petition was based on a trailer which did not even mention Mehul Choksi. It's on Nirav Modi. In the episode, he is shown for 2 mins: Kaul

It was a speculative writ which said that please regulate OTT content : Kaul

Writ is an extraordinary remedy. It cannot be issued is vacuum. Court asked him which trial was on. Not a single answer: Kaul

He has not joined investigation. His answer is that I've offered to join investigation through video conferencing. There is a red alert notice against him: Kaul

For all practical purposes, he is an absconder: Kaul

The Single Judge rightly held that it was bound by the Division Bench order which recorded the Govt's stand on OTT platforms not being regulated right now: Kaul

If there is an alternative remedy under IT Act, avail it. You also have civil suit remedy. Single Judge doens't direct him to to pursue IT Act remedy: Kaul

In Sahara case, media published details. Surpreme Court then laid down certain guidelines. The Supreme Court didn't say there should be pre publication injunction: Kaul

Surpreme Court said that an injunction may be granted in an appropriate case for a limited time. This is a case of possible trial: Kaul

What's his grievance based on? He doesn't say which trial is on. No judgement says that writ jurisdiction can be expanded to this level : Kaul

Batla House was a flim based on police diary. It had CBFC certification. The trial was on in that case. In that background the court said could you give more disclaimers: Kaul

Surpreme Court has said that injunction orders in sub judice matters should be far and few: Kaul

There is not right to privacy when it is already in public domain. These are not issues when you agitate right to privacy: Kaul

I've seen the episode . It is based on interviews, snippets, books etc. A source chart is there. We've taken his interview: Kaul

Court proceeds to adjourn hearing.

We will hear you at length: Court

Matter to be heard next on September 29.