ITV

Tag: Nutan Thakur

  • Allahabad HC asks government to form statutory forum for complaints against electronic media

    Allahabad HC asks government to form statutory forum for complaints against electronic media

    NEW DELHI: The Allahabad High Court has said that the government needs to provide a statutory forum for electronic-media where people can both approach and ventilate their grievances.

    In the petition filed by social activist Dr Nutan Thakur, Justice Devi Prasad Singh and Justice Ashok Pal Singh of the Lucknow bench said for any misconduct committed by the print media statutory forum is available in the form of Press Council of India but no such forum is available for the electronic media.

    The court felt that no such statutory forum is available and this does not seem to be proper in a country which is run by the rule of law and governed by the democratic polity and hence the union needs to provide statutory forum for electronic-media.

    The order said electronic media immediately affects peoples’ mind and it is well established that paid news items are often used by the media, which is an instance of abuse of power. Hence, prima facie electronic media should also be regulated and supervised by a statutory autonomous forum like the Press Council and the government should have provided some statutory forum to redress the grievance of the news items or other items of the electronic media.

     

    The order said electronic media immediately affects peoples’ mind and it is well established that paid news items are often used by the media, which is an instance of abuse of power. Hence, prima facie electronic media should also be regulated and supervised by a statutory autonomous forum like the Press Council and the government should have provided some statutory forum to redress the grievance of the news items or other items of the electronic media.

    The court directed the government to file an affidavit bringing on record its stand on this issue, within four weeks.

     

    The petition had been filed against the Information and Broadcasting Ministry and the News Broadcasters Association.

  • NHRC takes cognizance of assault on TV journalist

    NHRC takes cognizance of assault on TV journalist

    NEW DELHI: The National Human Rights Commission has taken cognizance of the criminal assault on Lucknow-based TV journalist Mohsin Haider by policemen of Lucknow police.

     

    Assistant Registrar (Law) has issued a notice to SSP Lucknow calling for report within six weeks. Sending a copy of this complaint to ADG, Human Rights, UP, NHRC has said that in case of default by SSP Lucknow, it may proceed to take such action it deems fit.

     

    According to a complaint sent by social activist Dr Nutan Thakur regarding the ‘unwarranted’ attack, she had asked for immediate action regarding criminal intimidation and criminal assault by sub inspector Ruma Yadav and constables Sunil Yadav and Siyaram Yadav of Chowk police station towards Haider and his family members.

     

    The three policepersons have already been suspended following the attack on Haider and harassment of his family members.

  • Case against Sanjay Leela, Censor Board Chief

    Case against Sanjay Leela, Censor Board Chief

    NEW DELHI: The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, has sought report by 8 December from the Station Officer, Gomti Nagar, regarding social activist Nutan Thakur’s case for registration of FIR against Kishore Lulla, producer, Sanjay Leela Bhansali, director of Goliyon ki Raasleela: Ram Leela and Leela Samson, Censor Board Chairperson.

     

    As per the complaint, this title was given despite specific order of the Allahabad High Court in a previous case filed by her where the Court had said that religious sensitivity needs to be addressed.

     

    Later the Censor Board under Samson passed this film despite knowledge of orders of Allahabad High Court in Vinod Shanker Misra case where Court had regarded use of word Raasleela as hurting the sentiments of Hindus, a fact which was proved when the High Court banned this film in UP, saying that its title hurt the Hindu sentiments.

     

    Based on these facts, Thakur had presented an FIR before the Police and approached the Court when the police refused to register the FIR.

  • Advisory on PMs speech should not to be used against news channels: Allahabad HC

    Advisory on PMs speech should not to be used against news channels: Allahabad HC

    NEW DELHI: The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has directed the Information and Broadcasting Ministry not to use against news channels the advisory issued by it last month about comparisons drawn between the Prime Minister’s Independence Day speech with other leaders.

     

    Social activist Nutan Thakur had sought quashing of the Advisory of 21 October passed by the Ministry.

     

    The Bench of Chief Justice Dhananjay Yashwant Chandrachud and Justice Rituraj Awasthi said the Advisory whereby the electronic news channels have been notified that their licence will be cancelled in case they compare the Prime Minister with any other political leaders should be used only for compliance of rules and regulations and not beyond.

     

    The petition said that the Ministry issued this Advisory threatening penal provision in Section 20 of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act 1995 because many news channels compared PM Manmohan Singh and Narendra Modi for their Independence Day speech which the Ministry found “indecent” and “bad in taste”.

     

    Calling the Advisory ‘a dictatorial step to curb the independence of media’, Thakur had prayed for its immediate quashing in larger public interest.

  • Allahabad HC asks government to form statutory forum for complaints against electronic media

    Allahabad HC asks government to form statutory forum for complaints against electronic media

    NEW DELHI: The Allahabad High Court has said that the government needs to provide a statutory forum for electronic-media where people can both approach and ventilate their grievances.

     

    In the petition filed by social activist Dr Nutan Thakur, Justice Devi Prasad Singh and Justice Ashok Pal Singh of the Lucknow bench said for any misconduct committed by the print media statutory forum is available in the form of Press Council of India but no such forum is available for the electronic media.

     

    The court felt that no such statutory forum is available and this does not seem to be proper in a country which is run by the rule of law and governed by the democratic polity and hence the union needs to provide statutory forum for electronic-media.

    The order said electronic media immediately affects peoples’ mind and it is well established that paid news items are often used by the media, which is an instance of abuse of power. Hence, prima facie electronic media should also be regulated and supervised by a statutory autonomous forum like the Press Council and the government should have provided some statutory forum to redress the grievance of the news items or other items of the electronic media.

    The order said electronic media immediately affects peoples’ mind and it is well established that paid news items are often used by the media, which is an instance of abuse of power. Hence, prima facie electronic media should also be regulated and supervised by a statutory autonomous forum like the Press Council and the government should have provided some statutory forum to redress the grievance of the news items or other items of the electronic media.

     

    The court directed the government to file an affidavit bringing on record its stand on this issue, within four weeks.

     

    The petition had been filed against the Information and Broadcasting Ministry and the News Broadcasters Association.

    The court noted: ‘Though prima facie against the decision taken by the non-statutory body, the writ petition seems to be not maintainable but we are of the view that keeping in view the public importance of the question raised by the petitioner in person for creation of some statutory forum where the people may address their grievance, the writ petition is admitted.’ 

  • Delhi High Court dismisses plea seeking ban on movie ‘Ram-Leela’

    Delhi High Court dismisses plea seeking ban on movie ‘Ram-Leela’

    Even as the Delhi High Court has dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a ban on the release of the movie Ram-Leela on the ground that it would hurt the religious sentiments of people, a review petition is coming up on this issue in the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court later this week.

     

    A division bench of Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justice Manmohan of Delhi High Court imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on NGO Rashtravadi Shiv Sena which filed the plea wanting a change of title of the movie starring Ranveer Singh and Deepika Padukone should be changed as it hurts the religious sentiments of people.

     

    (The Allahabad High Court had earlier rejected a similar petition by social activist Nutan Thakur on the ground that the film had not been cleared by the Central Board of Film Certification. However, Thakur has filed a review on the plea that the trailer has been passed by the CBFC.)

     

    Ram-Leela, which is scheduled to be released on 15 November, has been directed by Sanjay Leela Bhansali.

     

    The plea in Delhi filed by the NGO’s president Jai Bhagwan Goyal said: “The title Ram-Leela which is understood by Hindus as enactment of the life and story of Lord Ram (Maryada Purshottam), is nowhere doing the same but on the contrary the film is portraying sex, violence and vulgarity, which is deeply hurting the religious sentiments and feelings of Hindus.”

     

    “The enactment, production and scheduled release of the film Ram-Leela is a gross insult to the religious feelings of Hindus,” the plea said, adding the objection is only in respect of naming such a film Ram-Leela.

  • Allahabad High Court declines to act on Bhansalis Ramleela as it has not been certified

    Allahabad High Court declines to act on Bhansalis Ramleela as it has not been certified

    The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court has said it is not appropriate to pass any directions to the Central Board of Film Certification at this stage because the Board has not taken any decision on the matter so far.

     

    The Bench of Justice Imtiyaz Murtaza and Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya said the film has not yet been certified for public exhibition as required under Section 4 of the Cinematograph Act 1952 and hence the process of certification has not yet concluded.

     

    It said that at the time when CBFC examines the film for issuing certificate for public exhibition, it is expected that the Board will act in accordance with the provision of Cinematograph Act and other related laws.

     

    The Court order came on a writ petition against Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s film Ramleela on allegations that the title has religious connotations and hurts the religious sentiments of Hindus.

     

    Social activist Nutan Thakur said in the petition that the film slated for release on 15 November calls itself Ramleela of bullets. The official trailer of the film “shows abusive language and intimate scenes between Ranveer Singh and Deepika Padukone which are far away from the religious connotation the word ‘Ramleela’ carries”.

     

    The petitioner had prayed for immediate change of the name of the film and banning of Promos or non-grant of a certificate by the CBFC if the producer does not do so.

     

    Directed by Bhansali and produced by him and Kishore Lulla (Eros International), the film is loosely based on William Shakespeare’s ‘Romeo and Juliet’ but set in violent times. It stars Ranveer Singh, Deepika Padukone, Supriya Pathak, Richa Chadha, and Priyanka Chopra as guest artiste in an item number.
    Bhansali has said he is paying an ode to his mother’s name with this film.

  • Complaints filed against 21 companies and individuals on objectionable and misleading ads

    NEW DELHI: A police complaint has been filed in the Gomti Nagar police station in Lucknow against various companies and people with regard to advertisements on sex-power, obesity.

    This FIR has been registered on the complaint by Lucknow based IPS officer Amitabh Thakur and social activist Dr Nutan Thakur, who had earlier approached the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court on this issue but were asked by the Court to first approach the police.

    Based on their complaint under sections 3/5/7/9/9A Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisement) Act 1954 has been registered. The accused include a total of 21 companies and individuals like Sri Sai Safed Daag, Capsule More Power, Sex Grow Power, Titanic K 2 Capsule, Yoko Pharmacy, Dr P K Jain Clinic, Dr A K Jain Clinic, Jolly Bawasir, Altaz Dawakhana, Paras Medico, Hashmi Dawakhana, D Fit Capsule, Sanyasi Clinic. Parashuram Ojha is the investigating officer of the case.

    The Thakurs had in their public interest litigation appealed that as per section 3 of this Act, no advertisement about increasing sexual pleasure, women menstrual disorder and 54 diseases including diabetes, blindness, deafness, insanity, leucoderma, and obesity can be published while as per section 5, all kinds of magic remedies like talisman, kavach, and tantra is completely prohibited. Section 7 makes their violation a cognizable offence punishable between six months to one year. Justice Uma Nath Singh and Justice Dr Satish Chandra ordered them to avail alternative remedy of registering FIR.

    The Bench had said that since the alternative remedy of registering FIR against accused newspapers and companies is available, they should first avail this remedy and they can approach the High Court if they fail to get suitable remedy at that level.

    The petitioners had wanted the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, Registrar of Newspapers in India, and the Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity to be directed to ensure that such illegal advertisements do not get published in any newspaper or aired TV and all administrative and legal measures should be taken in case of violation.

  • PIL against Sahara ad reportedly denigrating Sebi

    PIL against Sahara ad reportedly denigrating Sebi

    NEW DELHI: The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court is expected to hear later this week a public interest litigation alleging that a full page advertisement dated 17 March 2013 by Sahara India Parivar and Subrata Roy Sahara are against the provisions of law.

     

    The PIL filed by IPS officer Amitabh Thakur and social activist Nutan Thakur says that a private person and a private organisation have openly denigrated and accused Sebi, which is a statutory body established to safeguard the interests of investors and to act as the market regulator.

     

    The ad has also criticised Justice B N Agarwal’s conduct while both Sebi and Justice Agarwal are only performing their official duty. The matter is still sub-judice before the Supreme Court and hence these people could have presented their grievance there.

     

    This act of criticising Sebi through an ad prima-facie is alleged to be a criminal misconduct under sections 186 and 189 IPC and provisions of Companies Act 1956.

     

    The petitioners have sought a complete ban on all advertisements where any constitutional or statutory body is criticised. They have also asked for enquiry into the issue and necessary subsequent legal actions against Sahara India parivar and Subrata Roy.

     

    The PIL is expected to be heard on 22 March before the Bench of Chief Justice Shiva Kirti Singh and Justice D K Arora.