The Supreme Court said that the Sudarshan News television program was vilifying the Muslim community.
New Delhi:
The Supreme Court virtual hearing in a case involving a private television company that aired episodes about “Muslims infiltrating” government services, had some quieter moments when leading advocates joked about the “silence button.” In a previous hearing, the furious court had ordered the show to be suspended for now, calling the show “an attempt to vilify Muslims.”
“The judges should have a remote control to silence someone,” Attorney General Tushar Mehta said today, when a lawyer inadvertently interrupted the hearing while addressing his client.
Later, when lead attorney Mahesh Jethmalani, who was representing one of the interveners, said the matter might not be over today, the Attorney General suggested that he needs to “silence.” “Communication with your client is privileged!” he pointed.
After Jethmalani said that the conversation “was nothing substantial,” Mehta jokingly replied, “With his last name, we don’t know who he’s talking to.”
Mahesh Jethmalani is the son of Ram Jethmalani, one of the country’s most reputable lawyers who passed away in September last year.
The Center told the court today that the prima facie Sudarshan television program violates the program’s code and a notice has been sent to them. The channel has to respond on the issue before September 28 on why no action should be taken against it. The Center asked that the hearing be postponed until then.
Ordering the Center to handle the case under the law, the court said it would hear the matter again on October 5. Meanwhile, the show will continue to be frozen.
In a hearing last week, the court had imposed the freeze, saying: “It seems that the aim of the program is to vilify the Muslim community and hold it responsible for an insidious attempt to infiltrate the public administration.”
The power of electronic media to attack a community, damage reputation or tarnish someone’s image is “enormous,” the court said. One of the judges commented that “the problem of electronic media is all about PRTs”, which generates more and more sensationalism that damages people’s reputations and “poses as a form of law.
.
