Karnataka High Court
M/S Power Smart Media Pvt Ltd vs Union Of India on 3 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JULY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K V ARAVIND
WRIT APPEAL NO. 949 OF 2024 (GM-RES),
WRIT APPEAL No.951 OF 2024 (GM-RES),
WRIT PETITION No.10639 OF 2024 (GM-RES) AND
WRIT PETITION No.10553 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
IN WRIT APPEAL No.949 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. M/S. POWER SMART MEDIA PVT LTD
1ST PHASE, POWER TV NEWS
POWERSMART MEDIA
Digitally NO.7, 11TH MAIN
signed by MATHIKERE MAIN RD
AMBIKA H B 1ST STAGE, GOKULA EXTENSION
Location: YESWANTHPURA
High Court BENGLAURU - 560 054
of Karnataka REP BY ITS ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
SRI. RAKESH SANJEEVA SHETTY
@ RAKESH SHETTY
2. M/S MITCON INFRA PROJECT
PRIVATE LIMITED
B-61, 6TH FLOOR
PLOT NO. 210
B-WING, MITTAL TOWER
FREE PRESS JOURNAL WING
NARIMAN POINT
MUMBAI - 400 021
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
REPRSENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. S.S. NAGANAND, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W
SRI. R. SWAROOP ANAND, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH MINISTRY OF
INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING
"A" WING, SHASTRI BHAVAN
NEW DELHI - 110 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY
2. DR. B.R. RAVIKANTHE GOWDA
S/O BESAGARAHALLI RAMANNA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
RESIDING AT BALAJI GARDEN
DOOR NO. 50, OBJECHUDA HALLI
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK - 560 082
...RESPONDENTS
(SRI. N. ARAVIND KAMATH, ASGI AND
SRI. H. SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI A/W
SRI. M.N. KUMAR, CGSC FOR RESPONDENT No.1
SRI. C.V. NAGESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W
SRI. B.N. MUNEDRAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR/
RESPONDENT No.2)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
JUDGEMENT AND ORDER DATED 25.06.2024 PASSED IN
W.P.No.10639/2024 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
IN WRIT APPEAL No. 951 OF 2024
BETWEEN:
1. M/S POWER SMART MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
ALSO KNOWN AS
M/S. POWER SMART MEDIA (OPC)
PRIVATE LIMITED
POWER TV TRADE MARK HOLDER
INCORPORATED AND REGISTERED UNDER
COMPANIES ACT, 1956
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
DABBEGATTA GOWDA MADHU LAKSHMANA
DIN NUMBER 08262181
NO.7, 11TH MAIN
MATHIKERE MAIN ROAD
1ST STAGE, GOKULA EXTENSION
YESHWANTHPUR
BENGALURU - 560 054
2. M/S. MITCON INFRAPROJECTS PVT. LTD
POWER TV: PERMITTED COMPANY
UNDER MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
AND BROADCASTING
INCORPORATED AND REGISTERED
UNDER COMPANIES ACT, 1956
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
MR. SHRIKANT MITESH BHANGDIYA
DIN NUMBER 02628216
B-61, FLOOR-6, PLOT NO.210
'B' WING, MITTAL TOWER
FREE PRESS JOURNAL MARG
NARIMAN POINT
MUMBAI - 400 021
3. MR. RAKESH SANJEEVA SHETTY
@ RAKESH SHETTY
S/O SANJEEVA ANTHAYYA SHETTY
ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
DIN NUMBER 01980021
POWER SMART MEDIA (OPC)
PRIVATE LIMITED
T-008, KRISHNA DWELLINGTON
DEVINAGAR MAIN ROAD
LOTTEGOLLAHALLI
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
RMV EXTENSION STAGE II
BENGALURU - 560 094
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. M. DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR ADVCOATE A/W
SRI. SWAROOP ANAND R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
AND BROADCASTING
"A" WING, SHASTRI BHAVAN
NEW DELHI - 110 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
2. SRI. H.M. RAMESH GOWDA
SO LATE H.G. MUNIYAPPA
@ MUNE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
RESIDING AT HMR RAMYA
SUKRUTHA NIVASA
NO.6, MAIN, 1ST CROSS
BYRAWESHWARA LAYOUT
HENNUR BANDE
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU - 560 043
3. SMT. DR. A. RAMYA RAMESH
W/O H.M. RAMESH GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
RESIDING AT HMR RAMYA
SUKRUTHA NIVASA
NO.6, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS
BYRAWESHWARA LAYOUT
HENNUR BANDE
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU - 560 043
4. UNION OF INDIA
BY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
NORTH BLOCK
NEW DELHI - 110 001
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
5. KIRTIKUMAR MITESH BHANGDIYA
DIRECTOR MITCON INFRAPROJECTS PVT. LTD
DIN NUMBER 01942251
B-61, FLOOR-6, PLOT NO.210
'B' WING, MITTAL TOWER
FREE PRESS JOURNAL MARG
NARIMAN POINT
MUMBAI - 4000
...RESPONDENTS
(SRI. K. ARAVIND KAMATH, ASGI AND
SRI. H. SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI,
SRI. M.N. KUMAR, CGC FOR RESPONDENT No.1 AND 4;
SRI. PRABHULING K. NAVADGI, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W
SRI. NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR CAVEATOR/
RESPONDENT No.2)
THIS WRIT APPEAL FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL
TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGEMENT AND ORDER DATED 25/06/2024
PASSED IN WP NO.10553/2024 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE.
IN WRIT PETITION No.10639 OF 2024
BETWEEN
1. DR. B R RAVIKANTHEGOWDA
S/O BESAGARAHALLI RAMANNA
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS
RESIDING AT BALAJI GARDEN
DOOR NO.50, OBJECHUDAHALLI
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI C.V.NAGESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI B.N. MUNENDRAPPA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA
THROUGH MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
AND BOARDCASTING, "A" WING
SHASTRI BHAVAN
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
NEW DELHI - 110 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
2. POWER TV
M/S. POWER SMART MEDIA PVT LTD.
1ST PHASE, POWER TV NEWS
POWERSMART MEDIA
NO.7, 11TH MAIN
MATHIKERE MAIN ROAD
1ST STAGE, GOKULA EXTENSION
YESWANTHPURA
BENGALURU - 560 054
REP. BY ITS ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
SRI RAKESH SANJEEVA SHETTY
@ RAKESH SHETTY
3. M/S MITCON INFRA PROJECT
PRIVATE LIMITED
B-61, 6TH FLOOR
PLOT NO.210, B WING
MITTAL TOWER
FREE PRESS JOURNAL WING
NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI - 400 021
REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR
...RESPONDENTS
(SRI N.ARAVIND KAMATH, ASGI &
SRI H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI A/W
SRI M.N.KUMAR, CGC FOR RESPONDENT No.1
SRI S.S.NAGANAND, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W
SRI R.SWAROOP ANAND, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.2 & 3)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT
RESPONDENT No.1 TO CONSIDER THE COMPLAINT DATED
04.03.2024 FILED BY PETITIONER AND CONSEQUENTLY TAKE
ACTION BY STOPPING THE RESPONDENT No.2 TV CHANNEL
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
FROM TELECASTING/BROADCASTING ANY NEWS FORTHWITH
AND ETC.
IN WRIT PETITION No.10553 OF 2024
BETWEEN
1. SRI H M RAMESH GOWDA
S/O LATE H G MUNIYAPPA @
MUNE GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
R/AT HMR RAMYA SUKRUTHA NIVASA
NO.6, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS
BYRAWESHWARA LAYOUT
HENNUR BANDE
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU - 560 043
2. SMT. DR. A RAMYA RAMESH
W/O H M RAMESH GOWDA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
R/AT HMR RAMYA SUKRUTHA NIVASA
NO.6, 1ST MAIN, 1ST CROSS
BYRAWESHWARA LAYOUT
HENNUR BANDE
KALYAN NAGAR POST
BENGALURU - 560 043
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI PRABHULING K.NAVADGI, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W
SRI NAVEEN CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA
BY MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
NORTH BLOCK
NEW DELHI - 110 001
-8-
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
2. MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
AND BROADCASTING
BROADCASTING WING,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
A WING, SHASTRI BHAWAN
NEW DELHI - 110 001
3. M/S. POWER SMART MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
ALSO KNOWN AS M/S. POWER SMART MEDIA (OPC)
PRIVATE LIMITED
POWER TV TRADEMARK HOLDER
INCORPORATED AND REGISTERED UNDER
COMPANIES ACT, 1956
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
DABBEGATTA GOWDA MADHU LAKSHMANA
DIN NUMBER: 08262181
NO.7, 11TH MAIN, MATHIKERE MAIN ROAD
1ST STAGE, GOKULA EXTENSION
YESHWANTHPUR
BENGALURU - 560 054
4. MR RAKESH SANJEEVA SHETTY @
RAKESH SHETTY
S/O SANJEEVA ANTHAYYA SHETTY
ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR
DIN NUMBER 01980021
POWER SMART MEDIA (OPC)
PRIVATE LIMITED
T-008, KRISHNA DWELINGTON
DEVINAGAR MAIN ROAD
LOTTEGOLLAHALLI
RMV EXTENSION STAGE II
BENGALURU - 560 094
ALSO AT
M/S POWER SMART MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
NO.7, 11TH MAIN, MATHIKERE MAIN ROAD
1ST STAGE, GOKULA EXTENSION
YESHWANTHPUR
BENGALURU - 560 054
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
5. M/S. MITCON INFRAPROJECTS PVT. LTD.
POWER TV: PERMITTED COMPANY UNDER
MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
AND BROADCASTING
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
MR SHRIKANT MITRESH BHANGDIYA
DIN NUMBER 02628216
B-61, FLOOR-6, PLOT NO.210 'B' WING
MITTAL TOWER, FREE PRESS JOURNAL MARG
NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI - 400 021
6. KIRTIKUMAR MITESH BHANGDIYA
DIRECTOR MITCON INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD.
DIN NUMBER: 01942251
B-61, FLOOR-6,
PLOT NO. 210 'B' WING
MITTAL TOWER, FREE PRESS JOURNAL MARG
NARIMAN POINT
MUMBAI - 400 021
... RESPONDENTS
(SRI N.ARAVIND KAMATH, ASGI &
SRI H.SHANTHI BHUSHAN, DSGI A/W
SRI M.N.KUMAR, CGC FOR RESPONDENT Nos.1 AND 2
SRI M.DHYAN CHINNAPPA, SENIOR ADVOCATE A/W
SRI R.SWAROOP ANAND, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.3 TO 5
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE
IMMEDIATE STOPPAGE OF BROADCAST INCLUDING TELECAST
OF THE NEWS, FEATURES AND SUCH OTHER PROGRAMMES
DISSEMINATED IN THE NEWS CHANNEL BEING RUN IN THE
NOMENCLATURE OF POWER TV AND ETC.
THE WRIT APPEALS AND WRIT PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, CHIEF JUSTICE DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
CORAM : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
N.V. ANJARIA
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.V. ARAVIND
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
N.V. ANJARIA)
These two appeals arise from two different, but verbatim
same, orders dated 25.06.2024 passed by learned Single Judge in
the respective writ petitions. The first mentioned Writ Appeal
No.949 of 2024 is referable to the order passed in Writ Petition
No.10639 of 2024, whereas the other writ appeal pertains to the
order in Writ Petition No.10553 of 2024.
2. The appeals are by two appellants, named M/s. Power Smart
Media Private Limited and M/s. Mitcon Infra Project Private Limited
respectively, who are the original respondent Nos.2 and 3 in the
writ petitions.
2.1 Since the facts in both the cases run parallel and the issues
are identical, both the appeals were heard together to be disposed
of by this common judgment.
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
2.2 Both the appeals impugn two orders of even date passed by
learned Single Judge in the petitions concerned, which are the
interim orders passed pending the final adjudication of the
petitions.
2.3 It appears that respondent No.2 in the writ petition-Power TV
has been facing certain allegations and the consequential notices
for alleged violations of applicable legal provisions. During the
pendency of the proceedings of the petitions, when show-cause-
notice dated 09.02.2024 was produced before the Court, in light of
that development, learned Single Judge passed the interim orders,
which are now subject-matter of consideration in the present
appeals.
2.4 The operative portion of the order in paragraph 7 is extracted
herein,
"Under these circumstances, in the light of the
undisputed fact that the proceedings have been
initiated by the Union of India pursuant to the final
show-cause notice dated 09.02.2024, it would be
just and appropriate to direct respondent
No.3/respondent No.5 and other private
respondents not to continue with any broadcast
and restrain all the private respondents from
carrying on any broadcast activity till the next date
of hearing.
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
Re-list this matter on 09.07.2024."
2.5 The aforesaid order directing respondent-Power TV not to
continue with any telecast and broadcast and further restraining the
private respondents from carrying on the telecast activity till the
next date of hearing came to be passed by learned Single Judge
upon noticing and observing certain aspects figured in course of
consideration of the controversy.
3. It would be necessary to notice the basic facts operating in
the background. The first Writ Petition No.10639 of 2024 came to
be filed by the petitioner who is stated to be in police service
serving in IPS cadre, whereas the petitioner in the other petition
from which Writ Appeal No.951 of 2024 arises happens to be a
Member of Legislative Council. Both felt aggrieved by the Power
Channel broadcast and telecast of allegedly defamatory
programmes and filed the writ petitions.
3.1 Drawing the facts from the first petition relatable to Writ
Appeal No.949 of 2024, it is the case of the petitioner that the two
appellants herein are the owners and run TV Channel in the name
of Power TV. It is the allegation that it is appellant No.2-M/s.Mitcon
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
Infra Project Private Limited though claims to be having the
authorization to run the Channel, the Channel is run by appellant
No.1-M/s. Power Smart Media Private Limited. It was pleaded in
the petition that on 08.09.2023, the respondent-Power TV released
a broadcast and certain promos, which according to the petitioner,
were defamatory, derogative and malicious, lowering the reputation
of the petitioners and that the story broadcasted in the promotional
programmes was a concocted story. Be that as it may.
3.1.1 It was further stated that in that view the petitioner had to
institute civil suit being Original Suit No.1602 of 2023 in the
competent civil court at Bengaluru Rural District. In the said
defamation suit, injunction was granted against the respondent-TV
Channel restraining it from telecasting or publishing any
defamatory news about the petitioner. It is the case of the
petitioners that despite the injunction, again on 22.09.2023, the TV
Channel and the owners thereof proceeded to telecast the
programme titled as "Dushta IPS" and tarnished the image of the
petitioner. It was stated that a contempt petition was also filed.
3.1.2 The petitioners stated that they filed representation. The
petitioner of first case made representation dated 16.10.2023
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
before respondent No.1-Union of India, Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting, to raise the issue that the TV Channel and the
owners had been violating Section 5 of the Cable Television
Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and Cable Network Rules, 1994
as well as the relevant Rules of the Programme Code. Pursuant to
this complaint, M/s. Mitcon Infra Project Private Limited has been
facing notice from the competent authority issued on 21.11.2023. It
was averred by the petitioner that M/s. Mitcon Infra Project Private
Limited did not respond to the Ministry.
3.1.3 It is the case that the petitioner came to know about
respondent No.3-M/s. Mitcon Infra Project Private Limited only
upon the aforesaid notice came to be issued to it. It was further
stated that as no response forthcame, yet another representation
dated 28.12.2023 came to be submitted by the petitioner. The
respondent-M/s. Mitcon Infra Project Private Limited was subjected
to one more notice dated 18.01.2024 by the Ministry.
3.1.4 It is the allegation in the notices issued by the Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting, Union of India, and it is the also the
case of the petitioner, that the TV Channel concerned has been
telecasting the programmes and the other promos without having
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
security clearance which is supposed to be obtained from the
Ministry for downlinking and uplinking channel operations.
3.2 Upon such premise of basic facts and raising various
grounds in the petition, referring the alleged violations of law, the
petitioner prayed to direct respondent No.1-Union of India to
consider the complaint dated 04.03.2024 which was lastly filed by
the petitioner and to take consequential action by stopping
respondent No.2-TV Channel from telecasting/broadcasting any
news.
3.3 The facts involved in the other petition are similar and
pleadings contain the allegations on the same lines. The prayer
made in that petition is to direct respondent No.1-Union of India to
take action against respondent Nos.3 to 6 for violating the
provisions of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act,
1995, the Cable Television Networks Rules, 1994 and also the
Policy Guidelines for Uplinking and Downlinking of Television
Channels in India, 2022.
3.3.1 It appears that in course of the hearing of the writ
petitions, where the learned Single Judge was apprised of
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
development about the Union of India, Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting having already issued notice dated 09.02.2024, upon
gathering the further facts, learned Single Judge passed interim
order, now impugned in the appeals.
3.4 In the said interim orders dated 25.06.2024, learned Single
Judge highlighted certain facts and aspects which are relevant to
be noticed,
(i) The contention in the petition was that the respondents-
appellants herein-the TV Channel and owners of the channel, had
been continuing the telecast/broadcast without obtaining necessary
approval/renewal of approval and that broadcast activity is without
obtaining necessary approval.
(ii) The proceedings were already initiated by the Central
Government against the respondents for alleged violations and
despite that, the telecasting of the programmes was carried on. It
was noted that the submission of advocate for the respondent-
Union of India was that, the proceedings have already been
initiated against respondent No.3/respondent No.5 and other
- 17 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
private respondents and that final show-cause-notice dated
09.02.2024 has been issued.
(iii) The final show-cause-notice was reproduced in the order.
The aspect was revealed in the said notice that M/s. Mitcon Infra
Project Private Limited was granted permission by the Ministry by
the letter dated 13.10.2011 to uplink and downlink a news and
current affairs in the TV Channel namely "Power TV".
(iv) The said permission was valid till 12.10.2021 and that the
company had applied for renewal of the permission.
(v) The application for renewal was made on 30.12.2022 which
is under examination by the Ministry for its merits.
(vi) The communication dated 06.02.2024 reflected that the
Central Government had addressed a communication to the
Director of respondent No.3/respondent No.5 informing them that
Power Smart Media Limited is not permitted by the Ministry in
relation to uplinking and downlinking of a TV Channel. The case of
the respondents was that the necessary renewal was obtained and
that they had permission to uplink the channel. However, no
renewal has been granted in favour of the said respondents.
- 18 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
(vii) No material is produced by the respondents either showing
approval for grant of licence or that such approval of licence are
valid and subsisting as on date.
4. All the learned counsels for the respective parties were
extensively heard yesterday. However, due to paucity of time,
order could not be dictated, which was today dictated in the open
court.
4.1 Learned Senior Advocate Mr.S.S.Naganand and learned
Senior Advocate Mr.Dhyan Chinnappa assisted by learned
advocate Mr.R.Swaroop Anand for the appellants appearing in the
respective appeals seriously questioned the impugned order. They
vehemently submitted that without deciding the main controversy,
learned Single Judge has passed the interim orders against the
appellants' TV Channel. They submitted that the development of
issuing notice dated 09.02.2024 took place in course of the hearing
of the petitions and did not form part of the pleadings and that the
interim order could not have been passed when the facts were not
pleaded.
- 19 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
4.2 Learned Senior Advocates for the appellants asserted that
the TV Channel is being run since several years with authorization
and that it is only on the basis of mere allegations of violation that
licence is not taken, learned Single Judge came to the conclusion
to direct stoppage of broadcast. Learned Senior Advocates
proceeded to submit further that in any case the renewal
application is made, and when the appellants have been running
TV Channel until the renewal is rejected, the Court has to view that
there is a deemed permission and the broadcast could not have
been abruptly halted by an interim order.
4.3 It was further sought to be submitted that the allegations in
the notice are unsubstantiated and are yet to be tested for their
merit. It was finally submitted that right to telecast through an
electronic media is a concomitant right to the fundamental right of
freedom of speech and expression flowing from Article 19 (1) (g) of
the Constitution.
4.4 It was submitted that the show-cause-notice dated
09.02.2024 preceded the grant of applications as many as three
times made by the TV Channel for change of portals and change of
location, which according to the submission of learned Senior
- 20 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
Advocates, implied that the authorities had no complaint against
the TV Channel. It was submitted that in view of the said aspect,
there should not be any impediment to renew the licence.
4.5 On the other hand, learned Additional Solicitor General of
India Mr.Aravind Kamath with learned Central Government
Standing Counsel Mr.M.N.Kumar appearing for respondent-Union
of India as well as learned Senior Advocate Mr.C.V.Nagesh with
learned advocate Mr.B.N.Munendrappa for respondent No.2 in Writ
Appeal No.949 of 2024 and learned Senior Advocate
Mr.Prabhuling K.Navadgi assisted by learned advocate Mr.Naveen
Chandrashekar appearing for respondent No.2 in Writ Appeal
No.951 of 2024, submitted that the order passed by learned Single
Judge was based on relevant considerations and cogent grounds.
4.6 Learned Additional Solicitor General refuting the case that
the details and materials on which the order was based were not
part of the proceedings, submitted that the respondent was well
aware of the issuance of notice dated 09.02.2024 and that during
the proceedings of the writ petition, the respondent took time on the
said ground for as many as three times. It was submitted that the
- 21 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
developments were argued and became part of the proceedings
which led learned Single Judge to pass the interim orders.
4.7 Learned Additional Solicitor General invited attention of the
Court to the Guidelines dated 09.11.2022 issued by the Ministry of
Information and Broadcasting, Government of India which are
Policy Guidelines for uplinking and downlinking of television
channels (page 149 onwards in the compilation of Writ Appeal
No.949 of 2024). The said guidelines, it was stated, stem from
Section 4 of the Indian Telegram Act, 1885 and have a statutory
force. It was submitted that for any TV Channel or TV telecaster
obtaining permission from the competent authority for uplinking and
downlinking the TV news or any other broadcast item, it was
emphasized, is imperative for both disciplinary and security
purposes. It was submitted that it is an obligation in law. It was
then pointed out from pages 192, 197 and 221 of the compilation
(Writ Appeal No.949 of 2024) that the respondents-TV Channel
and their owners have time to time sought permission for change of
uplinking and downlinking, change of teleport and satellite linking,
as well as change of locations to submit that the respondents were
not steady broadcasters.
- 22 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
4.8 Learned Senior Advocate for respondent No.2 highlighted
that since November-2021, the appellants do not have any licence
which is an undisputed fact. He further submitted that renewal is
only applied and so far has not been granted. It was submitted that
when the TV Channel has been facing a case for statutory
violations and non-compliance of legal provisions, until and unless
the same decided to its logical end, the question of renewal of
permission/licence does not arise and the renewal issue has to wait
subject to outcome of notice which is being adjudicated. He
submitted that there is nothing like deemed approval in law. He
also figured out that there are as many as 50 criminal cases
registered against the Director of appellant No.1.
5. The submission on part of the appellants that learned Single
Judge travelled beyond the pleadings or that the relief granted is
not traceable from the relief prayed for in the petitions, is stated to
be rejected. Running through the pleadings in both the petitions, it
could be immediately noticed that the allegations are made against
the TV Channel for alleged misuse of broadcasting rights and
telecasting of promos. In that regard a complaint was also filed by
the petitioner. Notices were already issued by the Union of India
- 23 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
calling upon the Channel and its owners to explain the alleged
violations which have remained unresponded by them. The last
representation-cum-complaint was made by the petitioner on
04.03.2024 which became subject matter of prayer of the petition in
Writ Petition No.10639 of 2024. The direction to stop respondent
No.2-TV Channel from telecasting/broadcasting any news, was
already part of the principal prayer. Therefore, it could be said that
prohibition of telecast ordered by the interim direction has no
genesis in the principal prayer. It could be well-linked with the
pleadings and the prayers made.
5.1 Having regard to the nature of order which is being passed
herein, the Court does not think it proper to delve into or decide any
of the submissions of the parties on merits, for, it may affect their
case which is yet to be decided by the authorities, except those
necessary for and in context of the impugned interim orders.
5.2 Dealing with this submission about breach of right to speech
and expression and right to telecast in banning the telecast
pending adjudication, the argument is attractive at the first blush,
however, not acceptable in substance. The appellants-respondents
have been facing legal notices even before the notice dated 9th
- 24 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
February 2024 was received. All the earlier notices remained
unattended and unanswered by them. The appellants are alleged
of running the Channel without licence and in violation of the
relevant laws, rules and the statutory guidelines.
5.3 In the petition, the averments are about indiscreet telecast of
defamatory and malicious nature. Although these allegations of
violation are to be probed, the fact remains that since November
2021, the channel's licence does not exist and the renewal
application was subsequently made in December. It is not the case
that pending the life of the licence, renewal is applied for, and in the
mean time the prayer is made to permit to continue telecast.
5.4 The show cause notice is being adjudicated. This Court by
order which succeeds herein, is inclined to set-down the timeline
for final decision to be taken by the competent authority upon the
show cause notice. It is needed that a state of equilibrium is
ensured when the serious allegations are considered and
adjudicated. It is only proper, both in facts and in law, that the
appellants are restrained from continuing the activity of telecast,
subject to the final outcome of the proceedings against them.
- 25 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
5.5 A temporary prohibition on the telecast, in such
circumstances, could not be said to be violation per se of the
fundamental right. Temporary phenomenon to prohibit cannot be
equated with absolute restriction. The right to telecast is subject to
regulatory measure. In the instant case, to be stated at the cost of
repetition, licence of the appellants has already expired. All these
circumstances could be viewed as reasonable and good grounds
not to permit the telecast in the interregnum, pending decisions on
the alleged violations. Any fundamental right is not absolute and
has to be subjected to legal as well as factual-cum-circumstantial
restrictions, which dictum is more true when it comes to the right to
free speech and right to telecast, because it is more prone to
misuse and indiscriminate dissemination.
5.6 Learned Single Judge could be said to be eminently justified
in not deciding the aspects of show-cause-notice dated 09.02.2024
having been issued to the respondents along with the other
previous notices by observing that notice is in adjudicating process.
The case against the respondents are to be tried after they would
reply to the show-cause-notice to be thereafter decided on merits.
There is no denial that the permission to uplink and downlink of
- 26 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
news and current affairs accorded to the respondent-TV Channel
was valid upto 12.10.2021 only and thereafter, there is no approval.
Although the company has applied for renewal permission, it is yet
to be considered to be subjected to a decision in accordance with
law. It is in this light that learned Single Judge passed the
impugned order to stop the broadcast pending the testing of the
allegations against the broadcaster and the owners of the
broadcaster.
6. The only wanting aspect which the Court finds in the order of
learned Single Judge is that learned Single Judge has not set down
any timeline for proceedings to be concluded pursuant to the show-
cause-notice dated 09.02.2024.
7. In light of the above discussion and the fact situation
obtained, the appeals are disposed of by issuing following
directions,
(i) The appellants shall have the right to reply to the show-
cause-notice dated 09.02.2024. If the reply is already filed, it will
be open to them to file a further reply, if they so advised.
(ii) Such reply shall be filed within one week from today.
- 27 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
(iii) The competent authority of respondent No.1-Union of India
shall give personal hearing to the appellants, if applied for. Upon
such application to be made by the appellants, the personal
hearing shall be given, on a date which shall be intimated to the
appellants.
(iv) The process of personal hearing shall be completed within
further one week from the date of the application, which may be
made.
(v) The competent authority shall decide the show-cause-notice
after considering the reply of the appellants and all other aspects
relating to the controversy within further period of three weeks. A
reasoned order shall be passed.
(vi) The authority shall thereafter also decide the renewal
application in accordance with law after considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, passing necessary order.
(vii) The entire exercise spread over the above stages shall be
undertaken and completed expeditiously and within the outer limit
of six weeks from today.
- 28 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
8. It is observed and clarified that this Court while noticing and
recording the rival contentions, has not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the case of the either side, since the issues are at
large before the competent authority to be decided finally. Any
expression of observation in this order shall not be construed as
expression on merits.
8.1 The decision which may be taken by the competent authority,
as above, shall govern the rights of the parties and they shall have
further right to approach the higher court/forum.
9. In view of the above arrangement and the order passed,
learned advocates for the parties in particular the respondent-
original petitioner could not dispute that subject-matter of the
petitions and the prayers in the petitions could be said to have
been finally dealt with. Since the above directions are issued.
Learned advocate for the original petitioners, therefore, seeks the
disposal of main writ petitions by way of withdrawal.
10. This court grants permission to withdraw the writ petitions.
They accordingly and in terms of the present order passed, stand
disposed of.
- 29 -
NC: 2024:KHC:24882-DB
WA No. 949 of 2024, WA No.951 of 2024,
WP No.10639 of 2024 & WP No.10553 of 2024
10.1 In view of disposal of the writ appeals, Writ Petition
Nos.10639 of 2024 and 10553 of 2024 shall be listed on Board
today before this Court for formal purpose of showing the disposal.
11. Both the appeals are disposed of as above.
In view of disposal of the appeals, the interlocutory
applications would not survive and they stand accordingly disposed
of.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
AHB
