City
Epaper

SC agrees to hear plea against Centre's decision to ban BBC documentary

By ANI | Updated: January 30, 2023 17:05 IST

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list on February 6 a Public Interest Litigation against the Centre's decision ...

Open in App

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list on February 6 a Public Interest Litigation against the Centre's decision to ban a BBC documentary on the 2002 Gujarat riots in the country.

A bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud said it would list the matter for hearing on next Monday.

Advocate ML Sharma, who has filed the PIL, mentioned the matter for early hearing.

The PIL sought quashing of the January 21 order of the Centre, terming it "illegal, mala fide, arbitrary and unconstitutional".

Meanwhile, senior advocate CU Singh also mentioned before the bench on how tweets by senior journalist N Ram and advocate Prashant Bhushan with links of the BBC documentary were deleted using "emergency powers" and how students from Ajmer were suspended for streaming the documentary.

The PIL filed by advocate Sharma also urged the apex court to call and examine the BBC documentary - both parts I and II - and sought action against persons who were responsible and were involved directly and indirectly with the 2002 Gujarat riots.

PIL has raised a constitutional question and the apex court has to decide whether citizens have the right under Article 19 (1) (2) to see news, facts and reports on the 2002 Gujarat riots, Sharma said.

"Issue writ of mandamus to the Respondent for quashing of the impugned order dated January 21, 2023 issued under rule 16 of IT rule 2021 being illegal, malafide and arbitrary unconstitutional and void ab-initio and ultra vires to the Constitution of India to provide complete justice," the PIL stated.

As per the sources, on January 21, the Centre had issued directions for blocking multiple YouTube videos and Twitter posts sharing links to the controversial BBC documentary.

Whether the central government can curtail freedom of press which is a fundamental right as guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (2) of the Constitution, asked the PIL.

It added, "Whether without having an Emergency declared under Article 352 of the Constitution of India by the president, Emergency provisions can be invoked by the central government?"

( With inputs from ANI )

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor

Tags: indiaAjmerSupreme CourtPublic Interest LitigationDy ChandrachudIndiUk-indiaRepublic of indiaIndia indiaGia india
Open in App

Related Stories

MumbaiViral Sighting of Tesla Cybertruck Near Mumbai Stirs EV Enthusiasm (Photos)

NationalPuja Khedkar Case: Supreme Court Directs Ex-IAS Probationer to Appear Before Police on May 2

NationalViral Video Claims Supreme Court Parking Area Is Filled With Luxury Cars of Top Lawyers

NationalPM Narendra Modi Discusses Tech and Innovation Collaboration With Elon Musk

NationalWaqf Act Hearing: Supreme Court Directs Centre To File Response Within a Week, Next Hearing on May 5

National Realted Stories

NationalPoster controversy: Police disperse protestors in Jaipur, say situation under control

NationalGujarat: Vadodara woman duped of Rs 5.61 lakh in visa scam, complaint filed

NationalRetaliatory actions against Pak reflect India’s strong policy against those promoting terror: Raksha Khadse

NationalMP: CM holds meeting on law and order, identified 228 Pak citizens to leave nation by Sunday

NationalRoad rage case: K’taka HC restrains police from initiating coercive action against IAF wing commander