‘Disturbing': SC asks YouTubers who joked about disabled to attend next hearing too
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi said this as it heard a plea by M/s SMA (Spinal Muscular Atrophy) Cure Foundation accusing YouTubers Samay Raina, Vipul Goyal, Balraj Paramjeet Singh Ghai, Sonali Thakkar and Nishant Jagdish Tanwar of cracking insensitive jokes on persons with disabilities (PwDs).
Complying with the court's direction during the last hearing, the five appeared before the Bench Tuesday.
The Supreme Court gave them two weeks to file a counter-affidavit and directed all except Sonali Thakkar to appear again before the bench on the next date of hearing. Thakkar has been allowed to appear online.
'Respondents number 6-10 are present in court in compliance with our order. Their counsel seeks and is granted two weeks to file counter-affidavit… No further time shall be granted… Respondents 6-8 and 10 shall remain present in person on the next date as well. Any absence shall be viewed seriously. Respondent No.9 (Sonali Thakkar) is permitted to appear online,' the bench said in its order.
Justice Kant said, 'Individual misconducts, which are under scrutiny, will continue to be examined. (SMA Cure) Foundation has raised serious issues. Something very disturbing.'
The court is also seized of two other petitions by YouTubers Ranveer Allahabadia and Ashish Chanchlani for clubbing of FIRs lodged against them in connection with allegedly objectionable remarks made on 'India's Got Latent' show.
In May, the court while hearing Allahabadia's plea to club the FIRs against him had flagged the need to put regulations in place for social media use. It also sought the assistance of Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta in the matter.
On Tuesday, the Attorney General sought more time to assist the court.
He said the question of their enforceability will have to be considered at length.
Allowing the request, Justice Kant said, 'We would like to test the guidelines… You have to have guidelines which are in conformity with constitutional principles, comprising both parts — where the limit of that freedom ends, and where duties start… We would like to invite open debate on that… Members of Bar, stakeholders and all so-called stakeholders, all invited.'
He sought to stress that Article 21, which deals with the right to life and liberty, would prevail over Article 19, which deals with freedom of speech and expression.
'Right to dignity also emanates from the right which someone else is claiming… Article 19 can't overpower Article 21… Article 21 must prevail if any competition takes place,' said Justice Kant.
He also pointed to the need to ensure that the guidelines are not misused. 'What we are doing is for posterity. What we do should not be misused by anyone, you have to ensure that too. There has to be a balance. We have to protect citizens' rights,' Justice Kant remarked.
Apology before NCW
YouTuber Samay Raina appeared before the National Commission for Women (NCW) on Tuesday and submitted a written apology over remarks deemed disrespectful to women in his show 'India's Got Latent'. The NCW summoned Raina over objectionable content in the programme aired on an online platform. During the hearing before NCW chairperson Vijay Rahatkar, Raina expressed regret for his comments and assured the Commission that he would avoid such statements in the future, according to a statement.
He also agreed to create content that upholds the dignity of women and spreads awareness about their rights and respect, the NCW statement said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
UCC panel formation not under statutory powers, cannot intervene: Gujarat high court
Ahmedabad: The Gujarat High Court dismissed a petition challenging the formation of the state govt's committee for the Uniform Civil Code (UCC) on the grounds of the absence of members from different religious communities. Justice Niral Mehta stated, "The court, by exercising powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot direct the state authorities to select members in a particular manner. Any direction and/or order, in that regard, would be said to be unjustified and unwarranted interference in purely administrative affairs of the state authorities, and thereby, this court would not like to go in the area, which is absolutely within the domain of the state govt on its administrative side. " Petitioner Abdul Vahab Sopariwala contended that the five-member panel, headed by retired Supreme Court Justice Ranjana Desai, was formed to examine the need for the UCC and draft the law. However, it does not have any member from Christian, Muslim, Parsi, Sikh, or Jain scholars. He also contended that the committee members do not possess any expertise in the field of personal laws, and some of them are interested parties because of their political appointments to certain positions. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Louisiana Launches New Policy for Cars Used Less Than 50 Miles/day Bindright Undo You Can Also Check: Ahmedabad AQI | Weather in Ahmedabad | Bank Holidays in Ahmedabad | Public Holidays in Ahmedabad The state govt asserted that the decision was taken by the state govt using its powers flowing from Article 162 of the Constitution. It is an administrative decision, and there is no statutory provision to back the petitioner's demand for direction to the govt for the formation of the committee in a particular manner. The HC stated that there cannot be any judicial review of the administrative decision of the govt taken under Article 162, and since the formation of the committee is not under any statute. It further stated, "By constituting a committee, it cannot be said that prejudice is caused to any class of people when more particularly it is always open for any class of people to make representation espousing their views on the Uniform Civil Code to the committee so constituted. "
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Court slams police for insisting on identity disclosure in minor's abortion case
The Bombay High Court has permitted a medical practitioner to carry out the termination of the pregnancy of a minor girl without disclosing her identity, pulling up the police for continuing to insist on such disclosure despite clear judicial rulings to the contrary.A bench comprising Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Neela Gokhale was hearing a petition filed by a gynecologist on behalf of a minor who had become pregnant following a consensual relationship. The doctor sought court permission to perform the abortion, as the pregnancy was at 13 weeks — well within the legal limit under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy (MTP) Act, 1971 — while maintaining the minor's Meenaz Kakalia, representing the petitioner, argued that forcing the disclosure of the minor's identity would breach her right to privacy and reproductive autonomy, both protected under Article 21 of the Constitution. She cited the Supreme Court's interpretation of the MTP Act and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, asserting that registered medical practitioners are not required to reveal the identity of minors even while submitting mandatory POCSO reports. While granting the requested relief, the High Court expressed concern that medical professionals still felt compelled to seek judicial intervention in such cases due to ongoing pressure from police authorities.'We are quite surprised that, despite the clear finding of the Supreme Court as well as of this Court, repeatedly holding that in the facts of such cases, the identity of the minor girl need not be insisted upon to be revealed, the Doctors concerned are compelled to approach this Court for such permissions as the Police insist upon the doctors to reveal the name and identity of the minor victims. This is nothing but harassment of the doctors as well as the minor victims,' the bench prevent further violations and ensure consistent application of the law, the Court directed that a copy of its order, along with the relevant Supreme Court ruling, be circulated to all police stations across Maharashtra. The order is also to be sent to the Director General of Police to ensure enforcement and avoid future infringements on the rights of minor victims and medical professionals.- EndsMust Watch
NDTV
2 hours ago
- NDTV
Uploading Burnt Cash Video Doesnt Mean Process Is Vitiated: Top Court To Justice Verma
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed with Justice Yashwant Varma's submission that the video of burnt wads of currency notes found at his residence should not have been uploaded on the apex court website. However, a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and A G Masih said just because tapes have been published on the website, it does not mean the process is vitiated and Justice Varma can go "scot-free". The top court said the impeachment proceedings will be held independently in the Parliament, without reference to the in-house report. On the question of delay in approaching the top court, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, arguing for Justice Varma, said a tape was released on the SC website and the judge's reputation was already damaged. "Tape was released. It was already released, my reputation already damaged. What would I come to court for?" Sibal said. Justice Datta remarked, "We are with you on this for the time being. It should not have been done." However, Justice Datta said, "It does not mean that there has been some lapse in the procedure, which affects the powers of the Parliament to take action against you, because Parliament, I need not to say with any emphasis, it has its own powers. "Parliament is not supposed to be guided by what judiciary says or what CJI recommends. They are supposed to act independently and if, at all, Parliament admits the motion and if an inquiry committee is set up, you know who can be the members of the committee. "Do you think those members, people of high calibre, would be influenced by preliminary report where you will have whole opportunity to demolish what are the findings," he said. The top court was hearing Justice Varma's plea seeking invalidation of a report by an in-house inquiry panel which found him guilty of misconduct in the cash discovery matter. The in-house inquiry panel report indicted Justice Varma over the discovery of a huge cache of burnt cash from his official residence during his tenure as a Delhi High Court judge. In an unprecedented move, the top court on Mach 22 uploaded on its website an in-house inquiry report, including photos and videos, into the discovery of a huge stash of cash at the residence of Justice Varma who was then Delhi High Court judge. The report contains photos and videos of the cash discovered at a storeroom at Justice Varma's house during a firefighting operation on the night of Holi, March 14.
