Thread by @barandbench

Sᴜᴅᴀʀsʜᴀɴ TV Hᴇᴀʀɪɴɢ ᴛᴏ Rᴇsᴜᴍᴇ
《Live Thread》

Justice DY Chandrachud led bench will hear the plea challenging @SudarshanNewsTV 's #UPSC_Jihad program at 12 pm. Senior Adv Shyam Divan for channel will argue to vacate the earlier injunction order

#SupremeCourt

Earlier the top court had injuncted @SureshChavhanke from airing the program detailing about how Muslims were infiltrating UPSC services. Sudarshan News claims the show is about the illegal foreign funding tied to terrorist linked organizations in minority UPSC coaching centres

Senior Adv Shyam Divan for @SudarshanNewsTV will begin arguments today citing how the injunction order needs to be vacated in view of freedom of press and speech.

Petitioners maintain the show disturbs communal harmony in the country and unjustly targest the largest minority.

Hearing to begin shortly.

@SureshChavhanke has joined the hearing today for the first time. Justice Indu Malhotra has too joined the hearing. Hearing begins at 12 pm

#rightofjournalist
@zakatindia
#freespeech
@Vakeel_Sb

Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde appears for @zakatindia : We have a watching brief. We are at the Centre of this plea. If we are not a party, then court made implead us Mr Divan refers to us. We are on the larger question here

Justice Chandrachud: Mr Divan has substantially raised a question about your client. Its your decision to intervene or not

Hegde: We are a charitable organization...

Justice Chandrachud : @SureshChavhanke says that your organization has a conflict. The PIL is not about you or to enquire into your affairs. If you want to intervene, we can ask Mr Divan and implead you

Senior Adv Sanjay Hegde: All that is being said here is often repeated outside the court..today there is an application for live telecast the proceedings. Zakat Foundation of India is non sectarian and out of 27 people the channel alleges, 4 are non Muslims.

Hegde: We don't conduct any residential programs. We only pay the fees of the IAS coaching classes. Such social service is not being done even at the government level.

Justice Chandrachud: you are arguing now. If you want to intervene then more the merrier.

Justice Chandrachud: Your FCRA records are contested here

Hegde: Give me time till Monday to decide whether @zakatindia will intervene or not

Senior Adv Divan: I will cite the affidavit to show the concern of @SureshChavhanke and how it is a matter of public interest and national security. Its a serialized telecast where 4 episodes are already aired. The channel has urged for judgment to be at the end of all episodes

Divan: The affidavit is brief. I will divide my submissions in a couple of buckets and then proceed onto law and then I will show how injunction may not be the wisest course of action. In constitutional courts the sole purpose has been to amplify right to free speech

Divan: If the court intervenes here then there might be an imbalance in the rights and freedom at stake. @SureshChavhanke looks at himself as a journalist and believes he has done an investigative story & that his story is based on solid facts and leave to audience to take a call

Divan: in terms of fairness quotient the dependent has said how the channel reached out to @zakatindia for comments which were denied. This story is for a news channel thus on a live feed. Thus additional responsibility on us and we are aware of that

Divan: Chavanke has maintained that he is not against any particular group. He says that real purpose of the affidavit is to set out facts and vacate the temporary injunction granted. Sudarshan News has been there for last 15 years and there has been no against @SureshChavhanke

Divan: Suresh Chavanke is heavily invested in the channel. He says he will face the consequences of transgression of law. It is not a case of a person making an inciteful statement and then disappearing.
@SudarshanNewsTV

Divan: it is not that all contributors to Zakaat foundation are terror linked. But there are some who are this money which is revieved is used to fund the education of the UPSC aspirants. This is something on which there needs to be public debate as its a national security threat

Divan: the channel came across certain alarming facts to the effect that certain organizations working outside India have hatched a conspiracy to infiltrate the bureaucracy.

Divan: Channel endeavoured to expose anti-national activities & the manner in which some persons are being recruited in All India Civil
Service under a design to induct persons with the financial support of international fundamentalists to achieve their oblique motives in India

Divan: in light of the facts mentioned herein about the foreign funding of Zakat Foundation of India, journalist has raised questions with regard to whether its activities are required to be investigated.

Divan: @SureshChavhanke believes that he is well within his fundamental rights to speak about these issues including on the
television channel.

Divan now reads as to how the channel reached out to Syed Zafar Mehmood of @zakatindia multiple times and that even a TV unit was sent for a comment but there was no response. In all 3 episodes a chair was kept empty for Mehmood so that he participates. This shows outreach

Divan: Zakat Foundation of India was founded in 1993 by one Syed Zafar Mahmood. Zakat Foundation of India is primarily involved in providing coaching to the aspirants of Civil Services from one
community.

Divan: From 2009 to 2019 a total of 119 Zakat Foundation of India fellows have joined the Civil Services as per their website. As per FCRA records available with Ministry of Home Affairs , @zakatindia received donations from Madina Trust
U.K.,

Divan: As per records of Charity Commission for England and Wales, Dr.Zahid Ali Parvez, Trustee, Madina Trust is also a trustee with the
Islamic Foundation...

Divan: The Times, UK had reported that two Islamic Foundation trustees were on the UN sanctions list of people associated with banned terror organizations Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

Divan: Madina Trust was also involved in an attack on Indian High Commission, London in September,2019.

Next, Zakat Foundation of India, links with Muslim Aid (U.K.) and
beyond. As per FCRA records available with MHA, they received donations from ‘Muslim Aid (UK)

Divan: The highest donations received from Muslim Aid UK is to the tune of 14 lacs.

Divan: As per Mr.Sam Westrop, Director of Middle East Forum’s Islamist Watch, General Khalid Latif who is Chairman of Muslim Aid
(Pakistan) was previously a Senior Official of Pakistan’s ISI. Muslim
Aid (Pakistan) works closely with
terrorist group Hizbul Mujahideen.

Divan: Westrop states that Muslim Aid, UK has repeatedly been found involved with a number of terror networks.

Divan: Westrop says in
2010, following investigative work by British media and an inquiry by Britain’s charity regulator, Muslim Aid, UK was found (and
admitted) to have been funding a number of front organizations for
the terrorist groups Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad

Divan: @zakatindia also has links with Zakir Naik. Zakir Naik is currently a Director of Islamic Research Foundation
(International) at

Divan: U.K.From 24.01.2007 to 20.12.2016 Mohammed Jafer Hussain Qureshi was Director of Zakir Naik’s Islamic Research Foundation (International) at U.K. He is presently Director of
Zakat Foundation of India (International) at U.K.

Divan: Syed Zafar Mahmood who is founder of Zakat Foundation of
India is presently Director of Zakat Foundation of India (International) at U.K.

Divan: It is the understanding of the answering Respondent that Syed Zafar Mahmood is closely associated with both Mohammed Jafer Hussain Qureshi and Zakir Naik.

Divan: ZFI has links with Zakat Foundation of America,
Khalil Demir and extremist organizations. As per FCRA records available with @HMOIndia
, @zakatindia received donations from Zakat Foundation of America which were deposited in their bank account

Divan: As per a report by non-profit research group i.e. The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) of United States of America, Zakat Foundation of America’s executive director is Khalil Demir.

Divan: Khalil Demir has signed the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 990 forms for Benevolence International Foundation (BIF) which US Treasury(U.S. Government) found guilty in the year 2002 for funding Al-Qaeda.

Divan: In addition to serving Benevolence International Foundation (BIF), Khalil Demir also has worked with the terror-tied Turkish Humanitarian Relief Organization (IHH). A

Divan: 2010 news release on the Turkish charity's relief efforts in earthquake-hit Haiti describes
Khalil Demir as an "IHH aid coordinator." The same year, IHH also referred to the Zakat Foundation of America as a "partner institution."

Divan: Turkish Humanitarian Relief Organization (IHH) has also helped in funding the Hamas military wing (terror group), which used the
money to buy weapons and build training facilities as per Israel's
Ministry of Foreign Relations.

Divan: IHH has been designated a terrorist organization by Israel, Germany and the Netherlands.

Divan: I believe this is not just a rant without facts. This is facts based journalism, facts are powerful and projected with a particular point of view. I dont say that point may persuade the audience. But I have a fundamental right to project this both in print and TV

Divan: Is it frivolous? NO. Can it be contested? YES. Zakat Foundation USA is not the same that funds the Indian one. Medina trust could be different name. A responsible journalist must entertain the response, contest it or agree its wrong.

Divan: Episode 2 was the crux of the program. If there was a pre broadcast ban then public would have lost out on a large amount of information which is important for the public. Journalism is fact based, opportunity to respond was given where correct info could have been given

Divan: @zakatindia could have held a press conference and contested it. That's how a democracy works. These are weighty issues which require a society to debate in a robust and fair manner

Divan: The economic times article about Medina trust can be sent to you. We can be wrong about FCRA records but that cannot be addressed with a ban

Divan: As a journalist it is my duty to work fearlessly and freely. The
disgruntled persons are trying to misinterpret the facts stated by me as they do not want that full facts may come before the nation otherwise the conspiracy hatched by them will be exposed.

Divan: The second basket of issues is the OBC reservation enjoyed by the Muslims. @SureshChavhanke
states that a minority community is taking benefit of OBC and minority scheme simultaneously and the same is a political and social issue which is why we are seeking a debate

Divan: The answering Respondent has further questioned whether the benefits granted to OBC from a minority community must be reviewed. It is respectfully submitted that in this context there was a graphic of 32 years ‘General candidate’ compared with 35 years OBC minority...

Divan: ... candidate. The answering Respondent while explaining the graphic had clarified that it is for Muslim OBC and not for General category Muslims candidate.

Divan: If a news channel is raising an objection of Muslims taking benefit of OBC quota the same cannot be communal and in this country time and again these questions and this debates are in public domain.

Divan: The answering respondent has just raised a question as to how benefit of minority scheme along with Muslim OBCs are taken simultaneously and the same amounts to discrimination against the other segments of the society.

Divan: IA has projected a wrong impression by showing a slide at page 104 of the application wherein the Sudarshan TV compared the maximum age of a candidate who can attempt for UPSC that is for
gen candidate age is 32 years & for UPSC Muslim OBC candidate is age is 35 years.

Divan: Sudarshan TV while
explaining the said slide in episode 1 and later on also has explained
and clarified that certain sections of citizens feel discriminated by
Muslim OBC candidates getting benefit of age relaxation ...

Divan: ... and also getting benefited of various minority welfare schemes floated by the Central Government.

Divan: It is in this regard a graphic was projected wherein how a person who starts the race from the same point gets discriminated by the Muslim OBC candidate who gets the benefit of age relaxation, number of attempts in UPSC and also the financial schemes of Central Government

Divan: ... for minority (Nai Udaan and Naya Savera).

Divan: Episode 1 shows Video clip of Akbarudddin Owaisi @imAkbarOwaisi
(Political Leader of AIMIM) which states as under:-
“I want our Muslims to become IAS, IPS, IRS and IFS”

Divan: Episode 1: video clip of a famous political leader and community leader namely Imran Pratapgarhi states as under:-
“If you want to improve the nation and get your rights(Haq lena chahte ho) then you have to capture the bureaucracy (bureaucracy pe kabza karo) ...

Divan: ... and there is no other option only capture the bureaucracy(sirf bureaucracy pe kabza karo)”

This statement has made shades

Divan: Syed Zafar Mahmood titled as 21st Century Kashmiri Renaissance on Aug 28, 2017, has given a presentation at Islamic University of Science and Technology Awanitipora, Jammu and Kashmir.

Divan: One of the slides which was broadcast was presented in the
above mentioned presentation wherein which states as “In
Uttar Pradesh, Nagina Lok Sabha Constituency has State’s
highest percentage of Muslims. 53.5.% Muslims. It is reserved
for SCs.”

Divan: In the said presentation National Flag of India has been
depicted in a different colour. The Ashok Chakra is missing in
the middle of the flag.

Divan: when there is a journalist who investigates and finds a large number of material regarding foreign funding which has funded extremist organizations in the past. ZFI has said that for next 35 years a post can be yours (Muslims). Under constitution, this can be criticized

Divan: People can respond by saying switching off tv or criticize the news show. But there can be no ban

Divan: One of the slides which was broadcast was presented in the
above mentioned presentation wherein Government notification signed by Deputy Secretary to the Government of India named as Mr. Rohit Garg is depicted and the caption says “Our boys and girls should sign this."

Divan: In in light of this its clear that a mechanism is existing in place which can be resorted to by the Petitioners and intervenors.

Divan: If there was a pre telecast van, the public would not have the advantage to know about the investigation the channel had conducted. None of this would have been known to the public. Journalist has collated and assimilated all the strands together.

Divan: If a ban was there then public interest was not served. Some one needs to come and show that document is fabricated or there was no such presentation. In that case statement needs to be issued or Journalist will stick to it.

Divan: The areas of OBC reservation, foreign funding, the statement made in presentations etc which warrant a show where public can know all of this

Now let me show you the common cause verdict

Justice Chandrachud: that is my verdict. Let's quickly go over it and let us put our doubts.

Senior Adv Divan: (reads the common cause verdict)

Divan: SC had recommended that Central Government, within the framework of Section 22 of the
Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, deliberate on the issue, and take a conscious decision thereon, and to finalize a similar statutory framework for radio programmes

Divan: You had further recommended that till the above
issue is considered and finalized, the existing mechanism of complaint redressal shall remain in place.”

Divan: rather than imposing select pre broadcast bans as if SC does this, the HCs will start doing. Especially in context of news channels because they are allowed live broadcast

Divan: . If a channel departs from programme code and makes reckless references then must channel must take consequences

Divan: If a point of view makes an individual uncomfortable then that is the goal of democracy. In the age of internet there is no restriction on Netflix etc but this kind of ban is anachronistic

Divan: Now that we have 4 episodes and that you have an advantage of an explanation via an affidavit, and now our show enters the realm of permissible speech and takes us out of category of cases where pre broadcast injunction should be ordered

Divan: We already have a robust statutory machinery to take care of complaints regarding defamation, untruth, etc where there are enough checks and balances. We are now in a area where remains 6 more episodes. The episodes must be allowed to be broadcast

Divan: There are limitations on graphics depending on the screen size. Many numbers i have placed on affidavit can be found on the scresnshots. This is an assurance to the court that there are certain degree of fallability but this is backed by facts

Divan reads a 1950 judgment around the freedom of press.
@SudarshanNewsTV
#freespeech

Divan cites a Delhi HC judgment of 2020 by Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva. This is in context of a TV serial.

Divan: Ms Shahrukh Alam has filed a short submission. The image is by Sudarshan News fans. This is not about Sudarshan News channel. Its not me.

Divan: A live chat was shown in the Court. During the chat it was the responsibility of the anchor to intervene if a statement was being made which violates the program code. Here Mr @SureshChavhanke had indeed objected

Divan: One segment of the program appears to suggest that there are exams allowed to be taken in regional languages as well. As far as Urdu is concerned, such exams are higher. We have checked these facts and secured the percentages from reliable sources.

Divan: If a pre telecast ban was imposed would the show have served a public purpose. There is a case here where people should be informed. Let the program continue till the final episode. There will be not any breach of any program code. There is no incitement of violence

Divan: There is a considerable amount of self praise in these episodes i agree but this is within the permissible limits of free speech

Justice Chandrachud: I think this was a great hearing. I dont think it could have been more focussed than what happened here... this is advantages of technology.

The bench will resume hearing at 2:15 pm.

Hearing resumes @SudarshanNewsTV

SG Mehta: the govt would like to respond as what has been presented is serious. I would need time on Monday to address. If you are vacating the injunction then I have nothing to say

Justice Chandrachud: Okay we will consider. Now Mr Divan, first we are also very conscious that pre publication restraint is matter of extreme recourse. We don't issue such injunctions readily thats why August 28 order. We know it can take us down a slippery slope.

Justice Chandrachud: I know we are dealing with 700 High Courts and the concept of precedence. We can use powers under Article 142 too. You as a journalist have a right to present views. You say its a fact based investigation into ZFI

Justice Chandrachud: You are entitled to do so if you feel it impinges on National security. You have distilled those facts about ZFO and said you are entitled to present it and also OBC issue which is a vexed one.

Justice Chandrachud: But Sudarshan News distills the speech from the facts in the affidavit.

Justice Chandrachud: look at Aneexure A1, when reference is made to Mr Owaisi, segment starts with flame in background. Words are used as "namakharam" etc. Again while Mohd Imran is quoted against flames are shown

Justice Chandrachud: chart is shown as increase in Muslims from 2011 in UPSC services. Graphic of skull cap, beard and green skin person is shown and again with flames in the chart

Justice Chandrachud: Look at Ms Alam's submission where live feed is extracted from the audience and anchor @SureshChavhanke ... you say "see how they are getting foreign funds, enticing our wife's and daughters and doing love jihad."

Justice Chandrachud: Look at the tenor of the statements. Audience says all things which has been elicited by the show. We have no issue with the NGO or sources of funding. The issue is you implicate a whole community as taking over the civil services.

Justice Chandrachud: This is the real issue. Whenever you show them joining civil services, you show ISIS. You want to say that Muslims joining civil services is a part of a deep rooted conspiracy. Can the media be allowed to target whole sets of communities?

Senior Adv Divan: My response is based on extremely narrow sampling. You have to look at the program as a whole. The whole for you today are the 4 episodes. The thrust of the program is not to be seen as a tweet or a statement. Should be seen as a whole program

Senior Adv Divan: I have said we have no problem in any young individual from any community joining the civil services on merit. The issue was we found certain organizations with foreign linking to be investing in such an NGO

Senior Adv: today our jawans are facing minute by minute hostility at the India China Border.. you saw the Indian Express story where a certain prominent individual were being monitored by China. This story is not demonizing a particular country or a community

Senior Adv Divan: UPSC is a rigorous process where everyone must aspire to join. He aims to show the illegal funding and double benefits as the OBC reservation. The issue of language benefit is also there. Look at the overall messaging of the programming

Divan: The channel wants to complete the broadcast. We are not running away anywhere. As far as the 4 episodes are seen as whole then a cuss word here and there should not ignite the jurisdiction of this Court to impose a pre telecast ban
.

Divan: sometimes a presentation is made with so many details etc that at times the message is lost. This needs to be simplified. The channel has a thesis and is trying to persuade the viewer to a particular point of view. It may be journalism that falls below the expectation

Divan: No one is saying the videos are doctored. The channel blends them into a Story and if @SureshChavhanke thinks he is joining the dots and thinks he is getting a picture and coming up with a thesis, please allow him to complete the thesis.

Divan: If there are flames, I find it offensive. But at times I too see them on TV and everything is a breaking news

Justice Chandrachud: Whenever you are showing a Muslim, you show them in a green tshirt and skull cap

Divan: it is stereotyping we require higher degree of sensitivity and the channel will now know that such an act should be frowned upon. I have no control over @SudarshanNewsTV

Justice Chandrachud: If you want to investigate @zakatindia then go ahead. But if organisation A funds people to go to Rao circle etc and if they are not only Muslims, and later it turns out that funding organizations is not overboard ...

Justice Chandrachud: ... but then painting all candidates as carrying out an agenda shows the kind of hatred. This is the element imof concerns..here free speech becomes hatred. You can't brand every member of the community..you alienate the good members too by divisive agenda

Justice Chandrachud: If we allow the broadcast, then what are the assurances that you are willing to give us?

You have said all funders are not terror linked, you want all members to qualify for UPSC and not oppose selection of meritorious candidates

Justice Chandrachud: We know how an injunction order will be looked like. I am afraid that there will be injunctions galore and we don't want that to be the law of land. We want to give your client a good faith option

Justice Chandrachud: You cited mine and the then CJI JS Khehar's judgment. We said rules need to be formulated so that grievances can logged in. No rules have been put out since the common cause verdict.

Justice Indu Malhotra: The flames etc needs to be taken off. We cannot dub the community and the picture of person wearing skull cap and green tshirt with a tag of 500 crores

Divan: Let episode 5 and 6 air. I will try my best that the message is conveyed to @SureshChavhanke please do not order these things as it does not fit a constitutional court directing X, Y, Z.

Justice Chandrachud: you have to tell us voluntarily what you will do to assuage our concerns. We don't want to come in the way of journalism. We know as a court what happened during emergency so we will ensure free speech and ideas.

Justice Chandrachud: Let a message go to media that a particular community cannot be targeted. We have to look after a nation of the future which is cohesive and diverse. We recognize national security but we need to respective individual respect too

Justice Indu Malhotra: I saw one of the episodes and it was hurtful to watch. You need to take down flames and the green tshirt etc

Justice Chandrachud: we cannot be censors and we will not lay down what to pull down and what not to.

SG Mehta: I know you are saying that rules noted in common cause had to be given publicity. All district collectors know about it. Regarding rule making there was no parent legislation. Now we have incorporated different kinds of penalties in a legislation and will seek comments

Justice Chandrachud: NBA says they have a committee headed by a retired SC judge. They can impose a maximum fine of 1 lac fine and this shows how toothless you are. But NBA is only for members, so Sudarshan News not being a member is not governed by NBA.

Justice Chandrachud: NBA says if they are brought in the fold of the program code then they can look at the errant channels apart from the members too.

SG Mehta: The issue of including NBA in program code is pending before the CJI in the nizamuddin markaz case. I will file my affidavit regarding the regulatory mechanism and there are judgments too in this regard.

Justice Chandrachud: How can you have self regulation when the self regulatory body is telling that everybody is not my member.

SG: I am not underscoring that self regulation is not important. But since the issue is about this case, let us widen the scope

Justice Chandrachud: If there was a viable method of regulation, we would not have to step out. Your undersecretary wrote saying program code should not be violated. @MIB_India didn't check what happened after broadcast and how program code was violation

Justice Chandrachud: An injunction order from us is like a nuclear missile and we know it. You, SG, tell us how will you bring in self regulation. You have to give them teeth.

SG: there is a case where a journalist was actually guiding the terrorist in Pathankot!

Justice KM Joseph to Sr Adv Divan: You have said that pre censorship cannot be there till all episodes are over. What are the consequences if you violate the program code. Can you be convicted under Section 16 of Cable Networks Act?

Justice Joseph: You are not a cable operator. You are a broadcaster.. now see rule 6 which says no program should be carried in cable services.

Justice Joseph: There are 48.5 million cable operators and this act applies to only cable operators. You are brought in by policy guideline of uplinking. That is why the common cause verdict may not apply to you.

Justice Joseph: You are here as a licensee. You are out of section 16 of CTV Act. Now under rule 6 a different phraseology is different. Rule 6(c) speaks about attack on religion or community cannot be there. You start with skull cap, green tshirt, it generates hate

Justice Joseph: apart from Muslims, there are Jains. My law clerk underwent the course funded by Jain organizations.. Christian organizations fund their candidates. Everybody wants to be a part of the power centre. Here you are marginalizing people from mainstream

Justice Joseph; in episode 4, Udit Raj, MP was there and see how he was treated. You did not agree with him. One of the member of the audience was interviewed and he says Muslims should not get OBC benefit. What kind of attitude are you inculcating by doing this program

Justice Joseph: All communities want a part of the slice of the power centre cake. You have put up a cocktail of various factors but at the bottom you are maligning an entire community.

Senior Adv Divan: I respect your perception. This does not mean that program code cannot be breached. There may be some case before court to see whether a code has been breached etc..

Divan: but I don't believe that any constitutional court has a first function to see whether a code is violated or not

Justice Joseph: You have a fait accompli here as govt has already allowed you after Delhi HC stayed its there are so many half truths in the show. They are in terms of percentages. Union wants Muslims to come up and 50% Muslims made it to the UPSC and now you are running it down

SG: We always strive to see all marginalized sections to come up.

Justice Chandrachud: we are referring to the policies of the state

Divan: I have an assurance now that grant me permission to file a clear affidavit on stereotyping which have a tendency to be precieved as hate speech among the viewers. He will make the affidavit by Monday. Until Monday, I will assist Sudarshan TV

Divan: Regarding Justice Joseph 's question, the idea is to project a story as cited in our affidavit. If there is anything that fosters hate should not be there at all. In certain level a good story stands diminished if you have all sort of rhetoric which is not needed

Divan: Regarding criminal sanction, you have held that press does not have a special freedom. Encouragement of participation of students needs to be looked at. We will look at all of this in our affidavit.

Adv Shadan Farasat: @SureshChavhanke had given an undertaking to Union too on the basis on which Centre allowed the broadcast on Sept 9. Then what is the worth of another undertaking? Pls watch episode 2 and 3, I urge Mr Divan to not go by briefings and watch all episodes

Adv Farasat: all these episodes are objectively hate speech and nothing else. We will like to pursue the court that it is indeed the constitutional court's duty to order an injunction in this particular case.

Justice Chandrachud: We have heard Mr Divan and we have given him an opportunity to Sudarshan News to file an affidavit saying what they propose to do.

Shahrukh Alam: does a deliberate propaganda deserve rebuttal? The affidavit filed here does not lay down at all what is shown

Justice Chandrachud: It is easy for us to intervene but the fear can we intervene in all cases like these.. question is creating a systemic framework for judicial intervention.

Adv Nisha Bhambani for NBA: We also make channels apologise in prime time. We are not toothless. Several SC and HC judgments commend our regulations.

Justice Chandrachud: do you watch TV?

Bhambani: Yes my lord

Justice Chandrachud: are you able to control it?

Bhambani: it has improved significantly but many are not our members.

Justice Chandrachud to NBA: come back to us on a method to strengthen the hands of NBA so that you have a higher regulatory content. You have a few members and thus implementability of your regulations is not strong. You need to tell us how it can be strengthened.

Senior Adv Preetesh Kapur for press council of India: We have a strong code of conduct and news papers have excercised far more restraint than electronic media. Our code of conduct can be looked into.

Justice Chandrachud: We would like SG Mehta so that government can think of something so that there is no outside interference with electronic media and that self regulation will be strengthened.

Senior Adv @anoopgchaudhari : please allow me to file an rejoinder

Justice Chandrachud: when do you need the permission of the Court to file a rejoinder. Please file the affidavit. Don't make it longer than Mr Divan's affidavit.

Adv Gautam Bhatia says he will take the court through certain legal points covering hate speech which will aid better reading of the affidavit.

Justice Chandrachud asks Adv Bhatia to help court with the aspect of restraint to be excercised in such matters by constitutional court

Matter will resume again on Sept 21, 2 pm.

Plea against broadcast of Sudarshan TV's "UPSC Jihad" show - LIVE UPDATES from the Supreme Court hearing [Day 4]

#SupremeCourtOfIndia #SupremeCourt #JusticeChandrachud @SureshChavhanke @SudarshanTVnews #UPSCJihad

barandbench.com/news/litigatio…

Issue is that you implicate a whole community as taking over the civil services, Justice Chandrachud to Sudarshan TV in "UPSC Jihad" matter

#SupremeCourt #UPSCJihad @SureshChavhanke #SudarshanNews #SudarshanTV
barandbench.com/news/implicate…

"Let a message go to media that a particular community cannot be targeted" 10 remarks made during the "UPSC Jihad" hearing in Supreme Court

#UPSCJihad #JusticeChandrachud #SupremeCourt @SureshChavhanke
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…