Thursday, November 18, 2010

Naik Paranjpe secures relief for Big Boss

Source : Sify.com

Viacom 18, which owns Colors channel has challenged the Central Government's decision to restrict the airing of the TV show 'Bigg Boss' only between 11 PM and 5 AM in the Bombay High Court.

On Thursday, it won a reprieve and the show will not have to move to the 11 pm slot for now.

Colors, which moved the court this morning, said: "No date has been mentioned as to when the show was against good taste and decency. The channel also said that its content cannot be described as obscene."

"The show has been on for one and a half months, what is the urgency suddenly?" asked Colors in court.

The channel further accepting that the government has the power to force a schedule change, said the advertisement commitment and content would have to be changed in that case.

Faced with mounting complaints from TV viewers and women outfits about objectionable contents, the Government had on Wednesday ordered channels airing TV shows 'Big Boss' and 'Rakhi ka Insaaf' to broadcast them only between 11 PM and 5 AM, virtually bracketing them as only for adult viewing.

"Both shows are not for universal viewing and can be aired only in the scheduled time slot," said Ministry of Information and Broadcasting officials.

While 'Big Boss' is being aired on Colors, 'Rakhi ka Insaaf' is aired on NDTV Imagine.

The decisions were reportedly taken at an inter-ministerial meeting represented by Additional Secretaries from the Ministry of Home, Women and Child Development, External Affairs and Information and Broadcasting.

Senior counsel Aspi Chinoy was instructed by Naik Paranjpe partner Ameet Naik in the writ petition filed before the Bombay High Court.

Delhi HC issues notices to Centre and Delhi Government to prosecute Arundhati Roy

Arundhati Roy
Source : Indlaw.com

The Delhi High Court has issued notices to the Centre and the Delhi government on public interest litigation, seeking directions to the governments to prosecute noted writer Arundhati Roy for her alleged seditious remarks on Kashmir made at a public function last month. 

Petitioner Salekchand Jain, through his counsel Sugrive Dubey, urged the court to direct the two governments to prosecute Ms Roy under the Prohibition of Seditious Meeting Act, 1911, and section 121 (waging and attempting to wage war or abetting the waging of war against the government of India) of the Indian Penal Code. 

Taking the petition on record, Justice Hima Kohli directed the respondents to file replies to the petition by January 23. 

The petitioner alleged that the writer had committed a crime under the Act and the IPC by making remarks on Kashmir at a seminar in the national capital last month. 

He said since the Union government had failed to take any action against her, it was the duty of the judiciary to step in and rein such people for making seditious statements. 

Another such petition in which Kashmiri separatist Syed Ali Shah Geelani is also named along with Ms Roy as an accused for making ‘anti-India’ remarks is pending in the Patiala House Court.

2G Spectrum Scam : SC directs Union Government to file affidavit

Supreme Court
Source : Indlaw.com

Solicitor General of India Gopal Subramanium today defending Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in the Supreme Court claimed that the Prime Minister has maintained high propriety in all communications including Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy’s letter.

Dr Swamy submitted before a bench comprising Justices G S Singhvi and A K Ganguly that some senior officials may be permitted to file an affidavit on behalf of the Prime Minister. 

The apex court directed the government to file by Saturday an affidavit on behalf of the Prime Minister giving details of all communications between the Prime Minister and Dr Swamy. 

The apex court told the Solicitor General ‘It is an extremely serious matter and all submissions made so far are only oral and therefore, you should file an affidavit so that if ultimately it is found that something important has been kept back, the record should speak.’ The Supreme Court adjourned till Monday the hearing of the two petitions in the Rs 1.76 lakh crore 2G Spectrum scam in which former Communications minister A Raja is the main accused. 

Dr Swamy had written to the Prime Minister in November 2008, seeking sanction for the prosecution of Mr Raja under the Prevention of Corruption Act. 

PMO responded to the letter after about 15 months on March 10,2010 and the CBI registered a case in September 2009 against an unknown person. 

Dr Swamy has been given time till Saturday to respond to the affidavit of the government. 

Dr Swamy had sent another letter to Prime Minister yesterday demanding that security of Raja be stepped up as he faces threat to his life from a Dubai based hitman and has expressed the apprehensions that he may be silenced forever for being in possession of sensitive information on the scam.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Government may introduce Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010

Source : Indlaw.com

A Bill proposed to ensure ‘greater accountability and transparency’ in India’s higher judiciary provides for ‘rigorous imprisonment and fine for frivolous or vexatious complaints,’ Parliament was told. 

Law and Justice Minister M Veerappa Moily said in a written reply in the Rajya Sabha that the government ‘proposes to bring in The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010,’ but did not say when it would do so. 

He was answering Janta Dal (United) member from Bihar Anil Kumar Sahani who wanted to know the salient objectives of the proposed Bill and steps to ‘check misuse of the legislation.’ The Bill will lay down judicial standards to be followed by the Judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts, a mechanism for enquiring into complaints against Judges and provide for declaration of their assets and liabilities, Moily said. 

The Minister said it would also punish misuse. ‘The Bill provides for rigorous imprisonment and fine for frivolous or vexatious complaints.’ Moily told another member that the government was collecting information on the number Supreme Court judgements which are more than two years old and yet to be implemented. 

He was answering Indian National Congress member from Andhra Pradesh Nandi Yellaiah who wanted to know the number of such judgements and the steps taken for their implementation, especially in his State. 

Answering Bharatiya Janata Party’s Jai Prakash Narayan Singh from Jharkhand, Moily said that a proposal to give the Law Commission ‘statutory status is under consideration of the government.'

Legal Blog on the Social Networks

Loading
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...