SC for OTT controls, says a few even show porn
The Supreme Court on Thursday said that few over-the-top (OTT) platforms show some kind of pornographic content at times and there should be a mechanism to screen such programmes.
A bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to place before it the recent guidelines of the government to regulate social media platforms on Friday, when it would hear the plea of Amazon Prime Video's India head Aparna Purohit challenging the Allahabad High Court order rejecting her anticipatory bail in connection with FIRS lodged against her over web series Tandav.
“A balance has to be struck as some OTT platforms are also showing pornographic materials on their platforms,” the bench, also comprising Justice R S Reddy, said.
Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Purohit, termed the case against her as “shocking” saying this woman is an employee of Amazon and she is neither a producer nor an actor but still she has been made an accused in around 10 cases relating to the web series across the country. Tandav ,a nine-episode political thriller starring Bollywood A-listers Saif Ali Khan, Dimple Kapadia and Mohd Zeeshan Ayyub, started streaming recently.
Purohit has been accused of inappropriate depiction of Uttar Pradesh police personnel, Hindu deities and an adverse portrayal of a character playing the prime minister in the web series.
Earlier, the apex court, on January 27, had declined to grant interim protection from any coercive action to Ali Abbas Zafar, Director of the web series, Purohit, producer Himanshu Mehra, the show's writer Gaurav Solanki and actor Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub. It had said that they may seek bail from courts concerned in the FIRS lodged in connection with the web series.
Now, Purohit has appealed to the top court against the Allahabad High Court's February 25 order declining anticipatory bail to her.
A single judge bench of the High Court had said that Purohit had not been “vigilant and has acted irresponsibly making her open to criminal prosecution in permitting streaming of a movie which is against the fundamental rights of the majority of citizens of this country and therefore, her fundamental right of life and liberty cannot be protected by grant of anticipatory bail to her in the exercise of discretionary powers of this court.”
While rejecting the plea, the High Court had said that the applicant was earlier granted interim protection from arrest by another bench in a similar case but she was not cooperating with the investigation.