ITV

Tag: Delhi High Court

  • Comedy Central to go off air for Six days

    Comedy Central to go off air for Six days

    MUMBAI: Beginning tonight, 12 am onwards, audiences of Viacom18 owned Comedy Central will not be able to view the channel, which is set to go off air for six days  as a penalty given by Delhi High court for airing objectionable content.

    The order comes after the Information and Broadcasting Ministry (I&B) found two of its TV programmes objectionable. The court observed that the show Stand Up Club telecast on 26 May 2012 at 20:52 hours on the channel “was not suitable for unrestricted public exhibition and children as the same depicted women as a commodity of sex and appeared to deprave, corrupt and injure the public morality and morals.”

    The channels spokesperson said in a statement, “The matter is subjudice. Having said that, we are evaluating all available options to us.”

    With regards to the other show named Popcorn which was telecast on 4 July 2012 at 7:57 hours, was also found to be “vulgar, obscene, offending good taste and not suitable for unrestricted public exhibition and children.”

    The channel on the other hand then submitted a reply blaming the telecast as an ‘operational mishap and unintentional error’ and apologized and assured that the creative, content and programming teams had been sensitized to the programme code. The Inter Ministerial Council which was set up to look at the violations of the programme code had asked the channel to go off air for 10 days.

    Comedy Central then was of the opinion that the ban was long and therefore the broadcaster blocked out the channel for only four days. Viacom18 had then placed an appeal in the court which has now been dismissed.

    The court also observed that the channel by committing a second violation (Popcorn) was clearly indicative of not  having paid heed to the warning given to it for the first violation, even if unintentional and took the matter of self regulation very lightly. “We may also add that the effect of punishment of prohibition of transmission for 10 days has already been diluted by the same being split into four plus six days. We therefore do not find any merit in this appeal and dismiss the same with costs of Rs 20,000 payable to the respondent within four weeks of today. Though the appellant has already given a statement as recorded in the order dated 28 May 2013 that in the event of dismissal of the appeal it would undergo the penalty imposed of prohibition for the balance period of six days, we clarify that the said penalty would come into force w.e.f. 00:01 hours of 26 November 2014,” the court observed in its concluding remarks.

     

  • NDTV files fresh application against Quantum Securities

    NDTV files fresh application against Quantum Securities

    MUMBAI:  Prannoy Roy-promoted media company New Delhi Television (NDTV) has filed a fresh application against a minority shareholder, Quantum Securities Limited (QSL) in the Bombay High Court, after QSL ran a newspaper advertisement accusing NDTV of not disclosing vital facts during a presentation to fund managers, equity brokers and investors by the company.

     

    Quantum owns 0.22 per cent in the group. According to the advertisement published in the Economic Times, QSL said the company, in its presentation, did not reveal certain facts that included the income tax departments’ demand of Rs 492 crore tax dues for the annual year 2009-10.

     

    “Sum of parts of NDTV group assets is not reflected in the market cap of NDTV. This is particularly true for the value of its digital assets.” It further said, the network had made no mention of the notice served to NDTV and its promoters by the department and a pending adjudication with the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT).

     

    The ad further highlighted that the issues relating to the Company Petition for Reduction of Capital filed by NDTV in Delhi High Court was also not mentioned. It quotes from an affidavit filed by the department “there are serious allegations of round-tripping for evasion of taxes in the case of the petitioner company for the annual years 2010-11 and 2011-12, being investigated.”

     

    The income tax department also objected to the decision of NDTV Board relating to NDTV Convergence and stated that the petitioner company (NDTV) has not disclosed material facts while seeking approval of capital reduction. This establishes that the applicant company (NDTV) has not approached with clean hands. This capital reduction has been proposed with malafide intention of defrauding revenue of its legitimate tax dues.

     

    Additionally, the ad said the presentation did not mention that NDTV Convergence had filed a charge to the Registrar of Companies, New Delhi that hypothecated all movable and immovable assets to YES Bank.

     

    In response to QSL’s ad, NDTV clarified to the National Stock Exchange (NSE) that the allegations were baseless as it had made all announcements on the proceedings (in the ITAT and the Delhi High Court) to the exchanges as required by law and also included those in the annual report of the company.

     

    “The allegations and insinuations and statements made by QSL in the said announcement are completely false, vexatious and have no basis in law or in fact. The announcement places selective material before the public at large and makes false and baseless allegations against the Company,” NDTV said in the notice.

     

    “The Company submits  that  the  allegations made  by  the  QSL in  the Announcement are  completely baseless as the  Company has in fact made all necessary  announcements in relation to the proceedings to the stock exchanges as required by law. Further, the necessary disclosures in relation to the same have also been made in the Annual Report of the Company,” the statement added.

     

    The notice by NDTV further highlighted the fact that QSL director Sanjay Dutt and his related companies have been investigated for market manipulation by capital markets regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India.

     

    Further it said, “At  the  outset  we   state  that   the Announcement is in flagrant violation of the injunction passed  by  the Hon’ble Bombay High  Court  against   inter-alia QSL and  its  directors including one Sanjay Dutt.”

     

    On 27 June 2013, the company sent a legal notice to Quantum Securities, Dutt and directors of the company, through its law firm Amarchand Mangaldas accusing him of making defamatory statements, writing to various regulators and ‘launching a tirade’ against NDTV because he bears a ‘grudge’ against the broadcaster. Dutt was a consultant to NDTV from 2006-08.

     

    The court had granted relief to NDTV by its orders dated 6 and 13 August and 13 and 17 October 2013, in terms of which QSL and its directors were restrained from issuing any defamatory letters, notices, emails, etc.

     

    Click here to read the full statement by NDTV

  • Govt. denies reports of imposition of penalty on Google

    Govt. denies reports of imposition of penalty on Google

    NEW DELHI: The Government today clarified that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has not imposed any penalty on Google Inc. for allegedly failing to provide information in a probe into its alleged unfair trade practices in India.
     
    It said that media reports on the order of the Commission being stayed by the Delhi High Court are erroneous, since no such penalty (reported by the media as Rs one crore) had been imposed.
     
    The Corporate Affairs Ministry said the Writ Petition No. 7084 of 2014 was filed by Google Inc. with respect to the case No. 06 of 2014 in which CCI has not imposed any penalty and therefore there is no question of stay of penalty.
     
    The case related to issue of confidentiality and an order was passed by the Court after hearing the Counsels of the parties.
     
    Meanwhile, the Court last week restrained the CCI from disclosing any information, considered as confidential by Google Inc, during its probe into a complaint lodged by an entrepreneur who also runs a website.
     
    Justice Vibhu Bakhru in his order also issued notice to CCI and sought its response within four weeks on the plea of Google Inc.
     
    “In the meantime, it is clarified that any information if submitted to CCI as well as to the Director General by the petitioner Google Inc, which the petitioner considers to be confidential, shall not be disclosed to any party and shall be kept strictly confidential,” the court said, and fixed the plea for hearing on 9 March 2015.
     
    Google said that it had challenged the jurisdiction of the CCI in its appeal relating to a complaint filed by entrepreneur Vishal Gupta before the panel.
     
    “The CCI lacks the territorial jurisdiction” and therefore was wrong to order a probe against Google Inc, it said.
     
    Google also said that its action to terminate AdWords account, meant to promote its Remote Tech Support services, of Vishal Gupta/Audney Inc has “no impact on competition in India” and it has “legitimately” been suspended.

     

  • Ad Cap case adjourned till 20 November

    Ad Cap case adjourned till 20 November

    MUMBAI: The Delhi High Court once again adjourned the ad cap case, this time to 20 November.

     

    The News Broadcasters Association (NBA), the lead petitioner in the matter, had sought 10 days adjournment as senior counsel S Ganesh, was not present in view to other pending cases in Mumbai.

     

    “We had requested to accommodate the case for 10 days as the senior consel had to go to Mumbai,” said the lawyer for NBA.

     

    However, the HC postponed the case till 20 November since it didn’t have any dates before that to hear the case.

     

    The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) advocate Saket Singh emphasised that the matter has already been pending for more than 10 months.

     

    During the last hearing on 15 July, the HC had adjourned the case as the final hearing of the bunch of petitions challenging the ad cap sort to be imposed by TRAI as the authority has not finalised its rejoinder.

     

    The case had been previously heard in the High Court on 17 December last year and 13 March this year.

     
    The NBA had challenged the ad cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial airtime on television channels.

     
    Apart from the NBA, the petition have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamoru, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

     
    The news and regional broadcasters fear that the capping of commercial airtime will curtail their ad revenues. They also argue that the ad cap must be brought only after the benefits of cable TV digitisation start kicking in.
     

    Earlier this year, the Court also granted interim relief to Hyderabad-based MAA Television Network against the ad cap regulation. However, the court had also observed that the cap on advertisements is a ‘reasonable exercise’.

     
    Four major broadcast networks—Star India, Zee Entertainment, Multi Screen Media and TV18 Group—are following the regulations.

  • Delhi HC extends stay on Kantar, case pushed to Feb 2015

    Delhi HC extends stay on Kantar, case pushed to Feb 2015

    MUMBAI: The hearing on the case between Kantar Market Research and the government of India has been put off to 12 February 2015.

     

    The case that was last heard on 8 September saw a notice of the application by the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (IBF) being accepted by the Kantar counsel that has been asked to file a response within two weeks. After this, an advance copy of the same will be given to the IBF who may then file a response in two or three weeks’ time.

     

    The case has been put off to 12 February 2015, on account of the personal reasons of the Kantar counsel, who had prayed for a date in January 2015.

     

    Meanwhile, the interim order on the case will continue that will allow Kantar’s subsidiary TAM Media Research to publish ratings till the verdict on the case is out.

     

    Kantar had challenged the cross-holding norm in the policy guidelines for TV rating agencies for which it had got the HC’s stay order. However, the research agency still hasn’t received any response from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on its application to be registered as a TV ratings service.

     

    Apart from the IBF, the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) has also joined the respondents in favour of the guidelines.

  • Delhi High Court stays EC’s paid news notice to Ashok Chavan

    Delhi High Court stays EC’s paid news notice to Ashok Chavan

    NEW DELHI: Former Maharashtra chief minister Ashok Chavan has received an interim relief with Delhi High Court putting a stay on the show cause notice issued by the Election Commission to the Congress politician.

     

    The Court also issued notice to BJP leaders Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi, Kirit Somaiya and one independent candidate who had filed complaint against Chavan to the EC.

     

    The poll panel in the notice on 13 July had asked Chavan who had stood from Nanded in Maharashtra as to why he should not be disqualified for not giving correct details of his 2009 poll expenses.

     

    A fortnight ago, the Commission had set a 20-day deadline for Chavan to respond to the notice, saying he had “failed to lodge his account of election expenses in the manner required by the (Representation of the People) Act and rules.”

     

    Chavan had moved the court against the EC’s order, saying the panel had not followed the procedure laid out in the Representation of People Act prior to giving its findings.

     

    He had also said that the expenses that he had allegedly not declared pertained to some advertisements that were released in October 2009 regarding a meeting that was to be held between the members of United Progressive Alliance (UPA).

     

    Senior advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Chavan and argued that the ex-CM did not know who had issued the advertisements.

     

    Chavan had won the 2009 assembly election from Bhokar in Maharashtra’s Nanded Lok Sabha constituency. He won the recent Lok Sabha polls from Nanded.

     

    It was contended that Chavan had incurred an expense of over Rs 16,000 for attending the UPA meeting that was advertised and that he had cited the same while filing his poll spends.

  • CBFC has powers to issue multiple certificates on various versions of films

    CBFC has powers to issue multiple certificates on various versions of films

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has been informed that the Central Board of Film Certification can issue multiple “certifications” with respect to various versions of a film. 

     

    In its affidavit filed before a bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice R S Endlaw, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry said the certificate is issued on the content as and when it is changed while being shown on TV channels. 

    The submission was in reply to a public interest litigation opposing issuance of universal certificates to an adult movie after deletion of some contents. The petition was also against the practice of conversion of ‘A’ films into ‘U/A’ and ‘U’ to enable their telecast on TV channels. 

    “Provision of the Cinematograph Act and Rules clearly provide for multiple certifications being issued with respect to various versions of one particular film.

     

    “Under the Cinematograph Act, the certification is done of the content and when there is change in content, recertification is required and is done,” the Ministry said. 

    The CBFC “has absolute power to certify films and it is also a competent authority to entertain applications seeking certificate of films which are altered by way of deletion/addition of certain scenes/dialogues.” 

    The plea was filed by Edara Gopi Chand, vice-president, Media Watch-India through advocate Gaurav Kumar Bansal. 

    The petitioner said children and adolescents are exposed to ‘adult’ film material like drug use, adultery, extramarital affairs, ribald comedy, intimate scenes of romance and sexuality, ‘item songs’ with vulgar lyrics and dance sequences, scenes involving rape and other heinous acts against women, films with extreme violence, films of horror and thriller genres etc. 

     

    “The adverse impact of such content on the impressionable minds of children and adolescents is well-established by various research studies at national and international levels. By such exposure, the due right of minors to be protected from harmful/age-inappropriate media content is being violated,” the plea said. 

  • Delhi HC adjourns Kantar case till 26 August

    Delhi HC adjourns Kantar case till 26 August

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High court today adjourned till 26 August the hearing in the matter relating to Kantar Media Research with regard to cross holding in TAM. 

     

    The adjournment came after justice Manmohan was informed that the new government had not appointed the advocate who would argue on behalf of the government.

     

    TAM can continue publishing its TV ratings till the court decides on the Kantar petition.

     

    The matter arose after the Information and Broadcasting Ministry directed all rating agencies to get themselves registered with the government and laid down conditions which barred cross holding.

     

     Kantar Media Research challenged the government regulation in view of the cross holding provision.

  • 219 private websites blocked for showing FIFA, Google does not figure in list

    219 private websites blocked for showing FIFA, Google does not figure in list

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has been informed by telecom player Airtel that it has already blocked 219 websites which were illegally streaming live the matches of 2014 FIFA World Cup.

     

    The Court had earlier on 23 June issued an injunction restraining over 400 private websites from showing the matches, following a petition by Multi Screen Media (Sony) that holds the exclusive rights for beaming the matches in India.

     

    Interestingly, the list given by Airtel does not list any Google website despite the fact that the Court had specifically cited two Google sites.

     

    The vacation bench of Justice V Kameswar Rao gave a directive to the Department of Information Technology and Telecom to ensure implementation of the order of the court. He also said that his directive would be forwarded to the concerned Ministry.

     

    The judge, who listed the matter to come up in the last week of July, gave the directive after hearing Saikrishna Rajagopal who was arguing on behalf of MSM.

     

    The sports arm of MSM, Sony Six is the official broadcaster of the football extravaganza, while its digital platform LIVSports.in has the exclusive rights to live stream the event.
     
    The network had moved the court after it found out that several unauthorised websites were streaming the World Cup matches illegally.

     

    MSM had said that it has the official rights to telecast matches in six channels in the Indian sub-continent, including Sony Six and offers live streaming on Sony Liv and Liv Sports (for mobile).

     

    The court order was revised on 1 July and the list of sites was modified after a list was submitted again by MSM. The High Court had also directed that the copy of the order must be sent to DoT and DIT, so that the Internet Service Providers can block the websites.

  • MSM moves Delhi HC on infringement of FIFA rights

    MSM moves Delhi HC on infringement of FIFA rights

    MUMBAI: Multi Screen Media (MSM) has moved the Delhi High Court over illegal streaming of the 2014 FIFA World Cup by several websites. The sports arm of MSM, Sony Six is the official broadcaster of the football extravaganza, while its digital platform LIVSports.in has the exclusive rights to live stream the event.

     

    The network has moved the court after it found out that several unauthorised websites were streaming the World Cup matches.

     

    The case which is up for hearing on 23 June, will be heard by a bench comprising Justice Siddharth Mridul and Sunita Gupta.  Advocate Saikrishna Rajagopal will present the case on behalf of MSM.

     

    The counsel sought an early listing of the matter on the ground that these websites were interfering with the network’s rights.