Is there any uniform policy on penalty for violation of Programme Code, Advertising Code under Cable TV Rules: Delhi High Court asks Centre

The Delhi High Court has directed Central government to file an affidavit specifically stating whether or not there is any uniform policy followed by it in imposing penalties for violation of the 'Programme Code’ or 'Advertising Code’ under The Cable Television Network Rules, 1994 (TV Today Network vs UOI). .The order was passed by a Single Judge Bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh after recording that while the Cable Television Network Rules provide for the two Codes, the consequences of violation of the same were absent. ."The Cable Television Network Rules, 1994, stipulate under Rules 6 and 7 the `Programme Code’ and `Advertising Code’. However, the consequences of violation thereof, are not clearly provided for. The matter thus requires consideration... Admittedly, there are no clear regulations as to the extent of penalty and punishment that can be imposed in case an advertisement is found to be objectionable and violative of the `Advertising Code’," the Court said. .The Court was dealing with a petition preferred by TV Today (petitioner) against an order passed by the I&B Ministry, Government of India. .Vide the impugned order, the petitioner had been directed to run "an apology scroll in bold legible font at the bottom of the screen for two days continuously" for running an advertisement of “All Seasons” Club Soda which was a surrogate advertisement for “All Seasons” Whisky..The L-shaped advertisement was telecast on Aaj Tak TV channel during the LIVE coverage of the Independence Day event. .Finding the advertisement objectionable in terms of the provisions of the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, a show cause was issued to the petitioner. .After hearing the petitioner, the I&B Ministry came to the conclusion that the colour and layout of the bottle being the same as the whisky bottle of the advertiser, the advertisement was nothing but surrogate advertising and hence, the direction to issue an apology was imposed..Before the Court, the petitioner inter alia submitted that it had taken all possible steps and exercised due diligence to ensure that the product being advertised was club soda. .It was added that the authorities failed to consider the fact that the soda product of the advertiser was sold both in glass and bottles..Centre defended the order on the ground that its timing was inappropriate..Noticing that the consequences of violation of The Cable Television Network Rules were not provided for, which required consideration, the Court further proceeded to deal with the interim relief in the petition. .The Court observed that from a first look, the Whisky bottle and the Club Soda bottle have the same look and feel/trade dress, which raises questions relating to `surrogate advertising’..Considering that the measure imposed could not be disproportionate and that the apology so directed ought not to interfere unreasonably with the normal telecast of the channel, the Court decided to reduce the frequency of the apology and the duration. ."Accordingly, at this stage, the Petitioner is directed to run a 10 second apology every hour between 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on two days i.e., 16th February, 2021 and 17th February 2021.", the Court ordered. .Listing the matter for further hearing in July, the Court added, ."In the counter affidavit, the I&B Ministry shall specifically state if there is any uniform policy followed by it in imposing penalties for violation of the `Programme Code’ or `Advertising Code’.".Senior Advocate Gopal Jain with Advocate Shahruk Ejaz appeared for the petitioner. .ASG Chetan Sharma with Standing Counsel Monika Arora and Advocates Shriram Tiwary, Amit Gupta, Vinay Yadav, Akshay Gadeock, Sahaj Garg, R. Venkat appeared for Centre. .[Read Order]