Andhra Pradesh High Court rejects PILs against Bigg Boss Telugu

The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently dismissed two Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petitions challenging the telecast of the reality television show Bigg Boss Telugu [K Jagadishwara Reddy v Union Of India and Others]..The petitioners claimed that the show promotes obscenity and vulgarity but the Court rejected the argument.What might appear to be obscene and indecent to the petitioners may not be so for a majority of citizens in the contemporary times, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur and Justice Ravi Cheemalapati observed.The Court further noted that Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and the Rules framed under it prescribe a comprehensive mechanism to deal with complaints of obscenity, vulgarity and violence. .However, the Court found that petitioners had not availed those remedies. They ought to have taken resort to the mechanism prescribed under the Rules to air their grievance before the competent authorities, it said."While the petitioner may feel strongly about content which is being aired by private respondent ... as containing scenes which are abhorrent or obscene to decency and morality and thus being in violation of the Programme Code, yet whether it is obscene and indecent has to be tested by the three-tier mechanism which has been prescribed under the Act of 1995 and the Rules of 1994," it added..The PILs alleged that Boss Telugu 6, hosted by renowned actor Nagarjuna, promotes obscenity, vulgarity, and abusive behavior which negatively affects children and youth.It was further argued that such content violates public decency and morality. Accordingly, a direction was sought that the show not be telecast without a censor certificate. .However, the Court said the law does not provide for any pre-censorship of programme telecast on private TV channels."By enclosing a few photographs and by claiming that the same were obscene, it would not per se suffice to prevent the private respondents from screening their show. The petitioner can, if so advised, avail the statutory remedies," it said..Accordingly, both the petitions were dismissed."We cannot convince ourselves to grant relief to the petitioner as was prayed for. The present writ petition (PILs) are found to be without any merit and are accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs," the Court ordered..Advocate Gundala Siva Prasada Reddy appeared for the petitioner. Central Government Counsel Venna Hemanth Kumar represented the Union of India.Senior Advocates O Manoher Reddy and C Raghu appeared for other respondents..[Read Judgment]