The Supreme Court has granted interim protection from arrest to Amazon Prime Video’s India head Aparna Purohit in connection with the FIR registered by Uttar Pradesh Police over allegedly hurting religious sentiments through a web show, reported LiveLaw.

The Bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and R Subhash Reddy observed that the protection from arrest will be subject to the petitioner cooperating with the investigation and appearing before the police as and when summoned.

Order: Petitioner is alleged to only be an officer of the company. In the meantime, we direct that the Petitioner should not be arrested, subjected to her cooperation. #Tandav #ITGuidelines #SOCIALMEDIAGUIDELINES

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) March 5, 2021

OTT Rules

The Supreme Court Bench also expressed dissatisfaction about the new rules framed by the Union Government to regulate OTT platforms. Justice Bhushan told the Solicitor General that the new rules “lack teeth” as there is no provision for prosecution or fine. Justice Bhushan opined that without proper legislation, effective action cannot be taken, tweeted LiveLaw.

Bench: We have received the Rules you have filed. These Rules don’t have any teeth. There’s no provision for prosecution. They’re only just guidelines.

SG Mehta: I bow down. #ITRules #Tandav

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) March 5, 2021

To this, the Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that the government will prepare a draft law and submit before court for consideration, reported Bar & Bench. As the court is set to consider new OTT rules, it impleaded the Central Government as a party.

LiveLaw quoted the Bench observing orally, “One issue that has cropped up is uncontrolled viewing of scenes in Prime Video. Union of India has issued notified new Rules in this regard. The Rules are in the nature of guidelines with no effective regulation of screening or taking appropriate action. Rules don’t list anything about appropriate action to be taken against those who don’t abide by the guidelines. The Solicitor General has submitted that steps will be taken for the same and it shall be placed before the Court.”

On March 4, according to a report in The Leaflet, the Supreme Court had observed that there should be some screening of shows run on Over-the-top (OTT) platforms such as Netflix and Amazon Prime Video. Justice Ashok Bhushan had also reportedly added that some web series indulge in pornography. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh Government agreed with the Bench and said “filthy abuses are shown”.

The case

Aparna Purohit, who has now been granted interim protection, had multiple FIRs registered against her for greenlighting Tandav, a web show that allegedly depicted Hindu deities in a derogatory fashion.

On February 25, the Allahabad High Court had rejected her anticipatory bail plea, holding that the sentiments of the majority community were hurt. Justice Siddharth said that apologising or withdrawing scenes from the series would not absolve the accused persons of the offence committed by them.

The court had also observed that there appears to be a design behind such acts where disclaimers are given and religiously, socially and communally offensive content is portrayed. It added that the young generation starts believing what is shown in the movies by the people like the accused persons, and it destroys the basic concept of the survival of this country having tremendous diversity as a united nation.

Related:

Tandav case: Allahabad HC denies pre-arrest bail to Amazon India Originals Head
Tandav Controversy: Amazon content head gets protection from arrest by Allahabad HC
Tandav controversy: Convenient distraction from an on ground crisis?

The post Tandav controversy: SC grants interim protection to Amazon India content head appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Allahabad High Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to Aparna Purohit, Head of Amazon India Originals in an FIR lodged against her with respect to the series “Tandav”. The bench of Justice Siddharth held that apologising or withdrawing scenes from the series would not absolve the accused persons of the offence committed by them.

The case

Purohit has been charged under Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Information technology Act and the Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act

It is stated in the FIR that in the “Tandav” series on Amazon Prime, the image of police has been adversely depicted, and that on account of the scenes and dialogues in the movie, the social harmony and public peace is being adversely affected. The FIR states that all this has been deliberately done to make the web series controversial and gain publicity for the purpose of commercial gain. The following allegations have been made:
 

• In a Dial 100 police vehicle, two actors are shown travelling with open doors in a police uniform, consuming liquor and hurling abuses

• Hindu Gods and Goddesses have been depicted in a bad light with the intention of inciting communal sentiments

• post of Prime Minister has been depicted in a manner which will adversely affect the democratic system of the country

• Caste and community related utterances have been made deliberately so that it may affect the public peace

• utterances have been made against the State police, public administration and the constitutional posts so that the element of hate is developed between the communities

• there are scenes which show disrespect for the scheduled castes

Submissions

Purohit’s counsel submitted that the series is a work of fiction and comes with a disclaimer to that regard. The cast and crew of the show issued an unconditional apology and removed the offensive scenes. She also submitted that the FIR is bad in law since there was no deliberate and malicious intention in the movie aimed at insulting religious beliefs of any class of citizen.

The AGA appearing for the State submitted that the number of persons across the country have felt that the web series is offensive and hence so many FIRs have been lodged against them. “Even if there is no regulatory body to grant certificate of fitness to the movies being streamed online, it was the duty of the applicant to see that the contents of disputed movie are not such which may be detrimental to the social, communal, religious and political peace of the country,” he added.

The depictions

The Court held that characters named Devakinandan and Kailash are part of the religious faith of the majority community of India, and their use by filmmakers in an offensive way is bound to hurt the sentiments of the majority community of the country. The court held that the esteemed and revered characters of the faith of the majority community of India have been lampooned and portrayed in a very cheap and objectionable way.

There was a scene in the series of a play on campus depicting Lord Shiva and Sage Narad, wherein Sage Narad is saying that the followers of Lord Ram are increasing day by day on social media and Lord Shiva wants suggestions from Sage Narad on how to increase his social media followers. Sage Narad replies that he should do something new, something blazing like flames, like all students on campus have become traitors, they are raising slogans of freedom. The court held thus, “The reference to Hindu Gods and Goddesses in the scenes in dispute in berating light cannot be justified. The advice of Sage Narad to Lord Shiva to make some inflammatory tweet on the Twitter like all the students of the campus becoming traitors and raising slogans of freedom clearly alludes to the incidents which took place in Jawaharlal Nehru University and therefore, it can be considered to be a message of hate advanced through the movie”.

The court also referred to a scene where one character says to another that “a lower caste man dates a woman belonging to a higher caste, just to get revenge for centuries of atrocities”. The court held that she has been depicted in a derogatory manner affecting her dignity since she has been made a symbol of revenge of a man of lower caste.

The court also held that use of the word ‘Tandav’ as the name of the movie can be offensive to the majority of the people of this country since this word is associated with a particular act assigned to Lord Shiva who is considered to be creator, conservator and destroyer of mankind all together.

The court held that apologising or withdrawing the scene would not absolve the accused persons of the offence committed by them.

Observations

The court observed that whenever “such crimes are committed” by citizens like the applicant inimical to the interest of this country become active and say that India has become intolerant. It further said that this then becomes a topic of debate in liberal democracies of the West and that Indian diplomacy has to face a tough time protecting the interest of the country.

Western filmmakers have refrained from ridiculing Lord Jesus or the Prophet, but hindi filmmakers have done this repeatedly and still doing this most unabashedly with the Hindu Gods and Goddesses, the court further added.

The court also referred to the Munawar Faruqui case and said that he made comments on Hindu God and Goddesses in a new year show at Indore, and gained undue publicity on being arrested. The court said, “Such people make the revered figures of religion of majority community source of earning money in most brazen manner taking benefit of the liberal and tolerant tradition of country”.

The court then referred to movies like Ram Teri Ganga Maili, Satyam Shivam Sundram, P.K., Oh My God, Goliyon Ki Rasleela Ram Leela where Hindus gods have been shown in disrespectful manner and their names used to earn money; and Padmavati where image of historical and mythological personalities were subverted. “This tendency on the part of the Hindi film industry is growing and if not curbed in time, it may have disastrous consequences for the Indian social, religious and communal order,” observed the court.

The court said that there appears to be a design behind such acts where disclaimers are given and religiously, socially and communally offensive content is portrayed. The court said that the young generation starts believing what is shown in the movies by the people like the accused persons and it destroys the basic concept of the survival of this country having tremendous diversity as a united nation.

Court’s findings

The court held that the offences under section 295A, 153A, 505(1)(b) and 505(2) of the IPC were fully made out. “On the one hand, the sentiments of majority community have been hurt by display of the characters of their faith in disrespectful manner and on the other hand, an attempt has been made to widen the gap between the higher castes and the scheduled castes,” the court opined.

The court held that “the applicant 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”.

The court thus rejected Purohit’s anticipatory bail application.

The complete order may be read here

Related:

Tandav Controversy: Amazon content head gets protection from arrest by Allahabad HC

Allahabad High Court protects Mirzapur series makers from arrest

Tandav controversy: Convenient distraction from an on ground crisis?

The post Tandav case: Allahabad HC denies pre-arrest bail to Amazon India Originals Head  appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Justice Siddharth of the Allahabad High Court granted protection to Content Head at Amazon Prime (India), Aparna Purohit from any “coercive action” or arrest in relation to an FIR registered against her in connection with the web show “Tandav” that released on January 15, 2021.

While reserving the order, the Single-judge Bench said, “Till the pronouncement of order no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.”

The Court was hearing an anticipatory bail matter filed by Aparna Purohit in connection with an FIR filed against her and others in Uttar Pradesh under sections 153-A (1) (B) (Act prejudicial to maintenance of harmony) 295-A (deliberate act to outrage religious belief), 505 (1) (B) (intend to cause fear or alarm in public), 505 (2) (statements promoting enmity) of the Indian Penal Code.

According to Bar & Bench, aside from Purohit, an FIR was also registered against director of the show, Ali Abbas Zafar, producer Himanshu Mehra and writer Gaurav Solanki and others at Hazratganj Kotwali in Lucknow (Uttar Pradesh) for allegedly depicting Hindu gods in a bad light in the web-series and “which could lead to religious flare-ups.”

LiveLaw reported that the complaint, lodged by Senior Sub Inspector Amar Nath Yadav stated that on perusal of Twitter handles and other social media platforms, angry outburst on social media against the content of the web series was noticed. The complaint also stated that in episode number 1, there are dialogues which may spread “caste-based enmity”.

The complaint also mentioned that the person holding a dignified post like that of Prime Minister has been shown in a very “derogatory” manner throughout the web series. On January 20, the Bombay High Court had granted similar relief of anticipatory bail for three weeks to the director, producer, writer and Aparna Purohit.

Bar & Bench reported that Bombay High Court’s Justice PD Naik was urgently approached after the four applicants apprehended arrest by the Lucknow Police, who had landed in Mumbai to investigate the matter.

Interestingly, the four applicants had also approached the Supreme Court last month seeking the clubbing and transferring of criminal proceedings that have been initiated against them in various cities for allegedly hurting religious sentiments, as per LiveLaw reports.

A Bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and MR Shah refused to grant any interim protection to the accused persons apprehending arrest from Police in six States and remarked, “You cannot hurt religious sentiments.” The Bench asked them to approach the appropriate High Courts for relief.

The order may be read here: 

Related:

Tandav controversy: Convenient distraction from an on ground crisis?

Tandav Controversy: Deepak Sharma demands ‘anti-blasphemy’ law

Allahabad High Court protects Mirzapur series makers from arrest

The post Tandav Controversy: Amazon content head gets protection from arrest by Allahabad HC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

It is a typical masala sprinkled political drama web series, yet Tandav, the show now airing on Amazon Prime, is now facing major criminal action after days of trolling over ‘hurting religious sentiments. Bar and Bench reports that now the Uttar Pradesh police have filed a case against the creators of the web series, after BJP leader Kapil Mishra sent a legal notice to Amazon.  

Amazon show #tandav in trouble as FIR filed in Lucknow. @KapilMishra_IND pic.twitter.com/5fWwNomQ1Y

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) January 18, 2021

The post Tandav controversy: Convenient distraction from an on ground crisis? appeared first on SabrangIndia.