On Tuesday, the Supreme Court strongly opposed the television program entitled ‘Bindas Bol’ aired by the Sudarshan news channel, news related to Muslims entering the civil service and which the channel had compared to “infiltration” and “Jihad.” .
A bench of three judges, led by Judge DY Chandrachud, said the claims made by the channel were “insidious” and also slandered the credibility of UPSC’s exams and were a disservice to the nation.
“Here’s a presenter who says a particular community is trying to infiltrate UPSC. Could there be anything more insidious (than such claims)? Such accusations affect the stability of the country and also question the credibility of the UPSC’s examination, ”Judge Chandrachud commented.
He said that every person applying for the UPSC goes through the same screening process and the suggestion that a community is trying to infiltrate the civil services does great harm to the nation.
“In the UPSC exam, everyone undergoes the same tests, interviews and is evaluated by the same people. But the implication is that a community is trying to infiltrate the UPSC. What you are doing does not give credit to our democratic system. Your client is doing the nation a disservice. We are a melting pot of cultures, ”Chandrachud told lead attorney Shyam Divan, who was speaking on behalf of Sudarshan News.
Sudarshan News indicated that the program raises a problem related to national security and that it is in the public interest to publish the story.
“The program complies with the program code,” said lead counsel Shyam Divan on behalf of Sudarshan News.
Divan also maintained that he was willing to provide copies of all episodes of the show to the court so that the court can decide whether or not the show breaks the law.
The court was hearing a guilty plea from lawyer Firoz Iqbal Khan, who claimed that the show contains disparaging statements about the Muslim community and is divisive in nature.
Judge KM Joseph, who was also on the bench, said that the freedom granted to the media is not absolute and the way that certain television channels conduct news debates today left much to be desired.
He asked Attorney General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the central government, to explore options to disclose the participation pattern and revenue model of media companies in the public domain.
“Certain channels silence panelists when they express opinions that go against the views of the presenter. This is unfair. No freedom is absolute, not even journalistic freedom, ”Judge Joseph said.
Attorney General Tushar Mehta said the freedom of a journalist is paramount and any regulation of it would need extensive discussion.
The bank recognized that regulating the media is a very difficult proposition. However, he called on Sudarshan News to exercise freedom of expression responsibly.
Last week, the Center allowed the Sudarshan News to air the program claiming a “major exposure on the conspiracy to infiltrate Muslims into government service.”
Previously, on August 28, the high court refused to impose a pre-broadcast ban on the news channel, saying it must be cautious in imposing a pre-publication or broadcast restriction of views and that it cannot prevent broadcasting. from a show based on an unverified channel. transcript of a 49 second clip.
.
