On Friday, the Supreme Court rejected the Hindu Sena’s public interest litigation (PIL). The plea sought a ban on the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) for airing the documentary ‘India: The Modi Question’, on the 2002 Gujarat riots, and launch an NIA probe into its plot to undermine India’s unity and integrity.
[BREAKING] Supreme Court dismisses Hindu Sena plea for ban on BBC, says cannot impose censorship
— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) February 10, 2023
report by @DebayonRoy #SupremeCourtOfIndia #SupremeCourt #HinduSena #BBCDocumentary @BBCNews https://t.co/1OkhJmN95c
“The plea was ill-conceived, and the Court cannot impose censorship”, a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and MM Sundresh ruled.
“Completely misconceived, how can this be argued also? You want us to put complete censorship. What is this”, the court asked. Senior Attorney Pinky Anand, a senior leader of the BJP, who represented the petitioner, was questioned by the court. “You are asking a court to force a decision,” the bench remarked.
Anand asserted that the High Court had overturned the ban in the “India’s Daughter” documentary about the Nirbhaya Case. She requested that the bench list the case along with the ones that are disputing the decision barring access to the documentary.
“Same thing happened in India’s Daughter. We have Kashmir. We had the Mumbai riots. Let it be heard,” Anand said requesting that the petitioner should be allowed to present his side.
“Let us not waste any more time, Writ plea is entirely misconceived. it has no merit. Thus, dismissed.” The court flatly refused to address the petition.
Vishnu Gupta, the national president of the Hindu Sena, filed the lawsuit through attorney Barun Kumar, claiming that BBC is to blame for spreading false information to undermine India’s integrated society and fomenting anti-India activities. A farmer from Muzaffarpur, Beerendra Kumar Singh, also requested an investigation into BBC’s reportage.
Gupta submitted, “The broadcast against India is selective and pointed to destabilize the integrity of India and divide the social integration of the country. Such an act in the name of free journalism cannot be permitted and therefore, such illegal, biased and divide and rule policy of the BBC requires complete banned from Indian soil.”
It was argued that the documentary film making false allegations against the current PM is reflective of both anti-Narendra Modi propaganda to damage his reputation and anti-Hinduism propaganda by the BBC to dismantle India’s social fabric.
It was also said that the BBC has held an anti-Indian stance ever since India gained its independence.
According to the plea, the BBC was previously prohibited from transmitting in India on August 29, 1970, by the Central Government, under the leadership of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, as a result of the BBC’s cold war broadcasts against India.
Moreover, it had been mentioned that, since 2014, India’s general growth has accelerated under the leadership of Narendra Modi, something the anti-India lobby, media, and especially the BBC can not understand. The BBC has been prejudiced against India and the Indian Government as a result.
In his appeal, the petitioner said, that despite his representation to the Union Home Ministry on January 27 to outlaw the network, no action had been taken as of yet. It was affirmed, that the right to free speech under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution is not an absolute right but is qualified by Article 19(2).
