Emergent notices ordered to govt and media in Ranjitha case

Justice B S Patil, who heard the matter, ordered an injunction to 40 news organisations including print and electronic media. An emergent notice has also been ordered.

In her petition, Ranjitha submitted that the video clipping telecast on March 2 last year was digitally manipulated.

She said she was petrified by the operation of TV channels and news organisations, which, she alleged, were telecasting the manipulated clipping of her and Nityananda.

She submitted that most of the programmes aired on Indian televisions "are not original, but copy of programmes aired in the US, which do not require any check and censorship in view of the culture there (US)".

Ranjitha, who was present during the proceedings, said the respondents were taking advantage of censorship and exploiting viewers and petitioners in general by not adopting any measures to curb prevention of any such telecast "which proves that the acts of the said respondents is illegal and unwarranted for".

Ranjitha's counsel Ravi Varma Kumar said respondents had "crossed all borders of obscenity" and such screening will affect sensitivity and emotions of people.

"Action of the respondents is in violation of provisions of law of land as per Information Technology Act 2000 and Indecent Representation of Women Prohibition Act 1986," Kumar submitted and sought a direction to prohibit the telecast of the clipping.

Ranjitha also sought a direction to Information and Broadcasting Ministry to restrain the respondents from telecasting obscene clippings and using any image, statements, reference and news pictures or articles of "scandalous intent".