IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUIDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. OF 2015

In the Matter of Exercise of Powers of the

Honourable Court Under Article 226 ofConstitution of India for taking suitableAction for maintaining Public Dignity,Order and Taking action against the Culpritsin accordance with law

1. Dr. Sharmila W/o. Sandesh GhugeAged about 42 years,Occupation: Service,

R/o. B/102, Madhupuri Apts, Gokhale Road, Dahanurkarwadi, Kandivili (West), Mumbai- 400067

Email :[...] PETITIONER:

.. //VERSUS//

1. State of Maharashtra

through Chief Secretary,Government of Maharashtra,

Mantralaya, Mumbai 400032Email: [...]

2. Commissioner of Police, MumbaiPolice Commissioner office,

D.N. Road,Mumbai- 400001Email: [...]

3. Union of IndiaThrough its Secretary

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi 110001.

...RESPONDENTS

TO,THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND OTHER HONBLEJUDGES OF THIS HONBLE COURT

THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONERS ABOVENAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH :

1. The petitioner holds a doctorate in law and works as a full time faculty inJitendra Chauhan College of Law, Ville Parle (West), Mumbai. She has also writtenand published various research articles on socio-legal issues in National and InternationalJournals to create awareness in the society. The petitioner has presented several researchpapers at National and International Conferences with special reference to awaken thesociety about womens rights. Being a faculty of law, the Petitioner desires that law ofland which provides and guarantees rights and protection to women and has also definedthe limits of decency should be implemented and strictly followed in the true spirit andnot merely in letter.

2. The petitioner is a public spirited person and a law abiding citizen of India. Thepetitioner has filed various public interest litigations in the Supreme Court of India andBombay High Court. A recent PIL filed for challenging the Maharashtra Fire Preventionand Life Safety Measures Act, 2006 is pending before the Honorable Bombay HighCourt. The petitioner has deep roots in the society and has great attachment with the highheritage and unique culture of the Nation, which is the reason why the petitioner is deeplypained to witness the cause of the present petition which is against the jurisprudentialaspect of decency and morality imbibed in the law of the Nation.

3. That, the petitioner being a responsible citizen is desirous of taking up the issuesinvolved in the present writ petition, with the authorities concerned. It is highlysignificant to bring it to the notice of the Honorable Court the recent incident of a showinvolving gross affront and disrespect to various individuals expressed in abusive andfilthy language which has most unpleasant consequences on the young generation.

Therefore, the petitioner decided to file the present petition.

4. The petitioner is constrained to approach this Honourable Court in the largerpublic interest, pointing out to this Honourable Court about the indecent and obscenelanguage used in the All India Bakchod, a roast show, commonly known as the AIB

Knockout show, which was held on 20th December 2014, by various film stars which notonly will adversely affect the young minds but will have unfathomable sweeping effecton the social fabric of the nation. Needless to mention that the show filled with vulgarlyspiced and peppered jokes is spreading like a viral at an accelerating stride through themedium of you tube video.

5. That, the petitioner has filed the present petition in public interest and no personalinterest of the petitioners is involved in the subject matter of the present writ petition. Thepetitioner is seeking indulgence of this Honble Court to pass and issue appropriatedirections in the larger public interest, so that the laws are adhered to protect the essenceof dignity of women, maintain decent behavior in the society and to assure that thequintessence of democracy is not compromised in the name of comedy andentertainment. It is respectfully submitted that respecting dignity of women is an essentialpostulate of supreme law of the land. Moreover, India being the largest democracy of theworld it is not only important to monitor but deracinate any act or statement which is infurtherance of lowering the dignity of women.

6 That, the petitioner had read in the newspaper about the AIB show which wasperformed live on 20th December 2014 at NSCI Worli viewed by more than 4000 personsas audience and the same has been uploaded on You Tube on 28th January 2015. AIBKnockout's guests of honour were Bollywood Actors Mr. Arjun Kapoor and Mr. RanveerSingh. The "roastmaster" (or master of ceremonies) was Film Producer Mr. Karan Johar.The roasters were All India Bakchod (Mr. Tanmay Bhat, Mr. Gursimran Khamba, Mr.Mr. Rohan Joshi and Mr. Ashish Shakya), television host Mr. Raghu Ram, Film CriticMr. Rajeev Masand, (who himself is the former member of Censor Board) as well ascomedians Ms. Aditi Mittal and Mr. Abish Matthew were a part of the show. The AIBKnockout show featured a galaxy of famous Bollywood stars who did not leave a singlesentence to be uttered without obscene and indecent words. The petitioner saw the paneldiscussion on 1st February 2015 on the Channel India News which featured imminentpersonalities from diverse sector to discuss the issue of the indecent jokes cracked andobscene comments on women by the public icons of Bollywood and other personsparticipating in the AIB show and the video uploaded on you tube. That, the petitionerwas shocked and surprised to note that the video of the show after been uploaded on youtube has attracted more than 10 million viewers in just a span of three days and it hasescalated up to 10,76,197 on the third day. In fact the number of people watching thisvideo is amplifying every minute enabling the petitioner to mention the exact figure ofthe same. Copy which is annexed herewith and marked as EXHIBIT - A

7. That, upon coming to know about such a program from the Television Show byname Kalank hosted by News India TV Channel on 1st February, 2015, the petitionerbeing a law faculty discussed this issue in the classroom while discussing theConstitutional Protection for Women on 2nd February 2015. For the surprise of thepetitioner almost all the students pursuing their three year LL.B. course had seen thevideo and gave their opinions about the same. The petitioner after listening to thestudents, out of anxiety and social concern personally saw the video, however could notcompletely see till the end due to the licentious and offensive language used in eachstatement of the performers of the show. It is most respectfully submitted that thelanguage used in the show is unbearable for any cultured and reputed person of civilizedbackground.

8. It is pertinent to mention that, each sentence used throughout the show by theBollywood stars, Mr. Karan Johar, Mr. Ranveer Singh, Mr. Arjun Kapoor and the othersis extremely offensive not only to the dignity of women but also to the basic valuescherished in our country. All kinds of vulgar jokes including vile words, digs at KaranJohars homosexual orientation, Ranveers promiscuity and Arjuns professional failingswere traded on the show. The audience has enjoyed the show with ostentatiouslaughter without realizing the future effect of such shows on the youth and the nation.The said content repeated several times in the show violates the provisions of Section 292and 294 of the Indian Penal Code as well as various other provisions of law. Moreover,the adverse comments past on various communities, such Christian religion and Sindhicommunity categorically not only violates Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code butalso deeply hurts the sentiments of Public at large. Similarly, the use of smutty and vulgargestures during the show and indecorous and undignified remarks on women withreference to rape violates Section 23 of the Indecent Representation of Womens Act.

9. It is most respectfully submitted that the whole conversation for a period ofalmost three hours shall be bad taste to be reproduced before the Honorable court for thevery reason that the petitioner may fail to put forth such dirty words which are beyondarticulation and expression by any decent person. However, following are some of thestatements made in show:

"I am not saying that Ranveer Singh does Sh** films but truly, the last good thing he wasin, was Deepika Padukone.""Ranveer spent 4 years in the industry. One of acting and three yrs of getting overAnushka Sharma.""Arjun has lost the kilos faster than Deepika lost her dating standards.""In 2 States, Arjun plays a Punjabi guy who falls for a hot Sounth Indian. So basically heplayed Boney Kapoor. ""Parineeti Chopra is not here tonight as we told her she will get f***ed by 10 dudes infront of 4000 thousand people. Karan Johar is here for the same reason."

"Deepika and Ranveer, what an awesome couple. Deepika is a state level Badmintonplayer. Ranveer is a national level sex offender. ""Kuch Kuch Hota Hain is Ranveer's favorite. Even today he will reach out to a box oftissues. Because he is the only guy who will j**k out to Farida Jalal.""Arjun and Ranveer send out the message that if you work hard, then one day, you toocan S**k Adi Chopra's C*ck.""No matter how remote, dangerous or smelly, if there is a hole, Ranveer Singh will enterit. "

"We wanted Ranbir, but we only managed Ranveer..which is what Deepika did, so itshould be okay" F***ing, Abuses by Mother name, Bhosdi Ke, Ch**t (Hindi Word for vagina), L**d(Hindi Word for penis), Male & Woman Genitals, were used very often.

Petitioner submits there much of obscenity and vulgar language and expressions wereused in the said program that the petitioner is feeling ashamed of reproducing the same.For the said reason, a Copy of said program as available on You Tube in form of CD, isannexed herewith and marked as EXHIBIT - B.

10. That, though the show was viewed by more than 4000 people as live performancebut the telecast of the show after being uploaded on you tube has multiplied the viewersinto millions within few hours. Needless to mention that the so called comedy stuffedwith inappropriate words outraging the modesty of women and insulting the dignity ofwomen has mushroomed like at an unbelievable speed through out the country. Allowingsuch act on part Respondents tarnishes the right to dignity of women guaranteed as afundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Additionally it theFundamental duty of every citizen of Indian enumerated under article 51 A (e) of theIndian Constitution to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women. Whereas,the film stars have made a deliberate attempt to lower the dignity of women by showingtheir insensitive attitude towards the most heinous crime of rape by passing several jokeson rape and gang rape enjoying the flavor of humour for the most unfortunate act anywomen can ever face in her life. Not only this, cracking jokes on gays, race, rape, ebolaand making homophobic jokes is an absolute insult to not only to women but all theindividuals. That such a rapid augmentation of audience to this video is unquestionablyaiming to adversely affect the youth of this nation. Particularly the sway and influence ofthese Film stars is beyond imagination on the youth. These celebrities are youth icons andthe young generation blindly follows them which indeed is misleading and disgraceful forthe nation in such incidences.

11. It is most humbly submitted that, it is highly significant to mention that the IndianConstitution under Article 19(1) (a) which guarantees freedom of speech and expressionis subject to reasonable state restriction in the interest of decency or morality. Any

indecent remarks passed or words used to lower the dignity of women are obscene in law.It should be noted that obscenity in India is defined as "offensive to modesty or decency;lewd, filthy and repulsive." Needless to state that the test of obscenity is whether thepublication, telecast, read as a whole, has a tendency to deprave and corrupt those whoseminds are open to such immoral influences and therefore each work must be examined byitself. The way to express something or to say something should be decent one. It shouldnot affect the morality of the society adversely.

12. That, the petitioner has learnt that as a first reaction to the program, after the

public uproar, the Honourable Cultural Affairs Minister of Government of MaharashtraMr. Vinod Tawde, made a public statement that action will taken if obscenity / vulgarityis found. However, from the subsequent statement from the DNA newspaper dated 2nd

February 2015 it appears that he changed his stand to the effect that that on AIB Roast,will only enquire if the AIB had taken appropriate certificate. No moral policing If theyallowed by law, I cant stop them. It is surprising to know that the Minister of CulturalAffairs is supposed to be the sole guardian of decent behaviour in the State is unawarewhether the AIB show had opted the required permission or not and that he is of theopinion that even if illegalities are performed, merely because permission was taken tohold the program, nothing can be done. Petitioner respectfully submits if such a blankatestatement is accepted and acted upon, there will be nothing less that suicidal, in as muchas, upon getting permission to conduct such programs, people will perform all sort ofillegal acts to poison or corrupt the mind of public at large and more particularly youth ofthe country. It is also surprising to note from the press reports that despite the fact thatcomplaints have been made to various police authorities in Mumbai on 2nd February2015, it is learnt that the police authority is not taking any action and is making a show ofconducting enquiry about the show. This is despite the fact that the complaints lodgeddiscloses a cognizable nature of offences. Still no offences are yet registered against anyperson in the present matter. Copies of the news reports about the complaints lodged inthe matter, are annexed herewith and collectively marked as EXHIBIT - C

13. That, the video of the AIB show which has been uploaded on 28th January 2015has not been verified by any of the authorities, whether the content of the video issuitable to be thrown open to public at large. The said video has been uploaded by theorganizers of the AIB show as evident from the titles of the video. Neither the organizersnor the respondents felt the need and importance of verifying the content before puttingthe video on air, which needless to state has gone viral amongst people, more particularlyyouths. It is pertinent to mention that, if it was a show of an ordinary person gettingpermission for the same would have been a great hassle, however as it was by BollywoodBig stars event the permission was granted even without verifying the nature and contentof the show. Though the show was hosted in the name of charity any prudent humanbeing will not be able to establish a connection or any rational nexus between obscene

gestures using offensive language and charity. Needless to mention that the AIB showhas crossed all known cannons of decent behavior and civilized freedom of speech andexpression expected in the society by the reputed and known personalities of Bollywoodwho are looked upon as idols by millions of their fans.

14. It is most respectfully submitted that, the Act of the AIB Team of uploading thevideo on you tube and making it available for the whole world without following thelegal provisions and norms itself is a gross failure and miscarriage of justice. It iscategorically mentioned under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 thatthe content to be communicated should not be insulting for any person. It is also pertinentto note that for the purpose of this section, terms electronic mail and electronic mailmessage means a message or information created or transmitted or received on acomputer, computer system, computer resource or communication device includingattachments in text, images, audio, video and any other electronic record, which may betransmitted with the message. Therefore it was the responsibility and duty of YOUTUBEto follow the procedure and verify the content of the video uploaded which is astorehouse of insults to numerous individuals under the blanket of comedy andentertainment.

15. It also important to bring it to the kind notice of the Honorable Court that Section79 of the amended Information Technology Act, 2000 provides the broad principle thatintermediaries like Government departments providing social media facilities aregenerally not liable for third party data information or communication link madeavailable by them. However, this exemption from liability can only be applicable if thesaid Government department complies with various conditions of law as prescribed.

16. It is imperative to mention that, whether the required censor certificate andrequisite permissions were obtained by the AIB Team before uploading the video. It ismost respectfully submitted to the Honorable Court that, the aforesaid is the current legalposition in India which impacts Government departments providing social mediafacilities on their network. In the light of the stringent provisions of the law and thesubsequent legal consequences for non-compliance of the law, it is therefore absolutelyessential that the relevant Government department providing social media facilities suchas the you tube must completely comply with all the above mentioned legal parameters asmandatorily stipulated by the Information Technology Act, 2000 as amended by theInformation Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 and various rules, regulations andnotifications issued there under.

17. It is worthwhile to bring it to the kind notice of the Honourable Court that theshow did not even spare the respected Prime Minister, Mr. Narendra Modi from the dirtyjokes. Several stalwart politicians including the former Prime Minister of India, MrManmohan singh, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, Ms. Smriti Irani, etc., have been insulted by the

various comments passed by the performers of the AIB show. This act showingdisrespect to the Prime Minister of the nation under the banner of comedy should not betolerated and accepted as humour. Each individual who is looked upon as a role modelmust set forth benchmarks before the young generation and not such disgracefulstatements made for worthy personalities of national stature.

18. It is significant to mention that, since the AIB show has featured such indecentwords, the matter has been taken up by a news channel, namely INDIA NEWS. A writtencomplaint has been filed on 2nd February 2015 by Mr. Akhilesh Tiwari, President ofBhrahim Ekta Seva Santha, Mumbai. The said complaint is filed on grounds of use ofextremely vulgar, abusive language which is step towards ruining the clean image ofIndian culture and dignity of women misleading todays youth. Copy which alongwiththe subsequent statement made by the said person to the press that the program wasnothing less that a porn film, are annexed herewith and collectively marked as EXHIBIT- D.

19. The Petitioner respectfully submits that granting permission to host such showsand the telecast of such shows on the social media via you tube is tarnishing the image ofour society and thus disrupting the social fabric which is interwoven with golden threadsof decency, morality and values, is thus violative of rights of citizens. It is respectfullysubmitted that this Honorable Court has been assigned the active role of protecting rightsof citizens and has vast powers which needs to be exercised to evolve its jurisdiction withcreativity, vision, vigilance and pragmatic wisdom, in the larger interest of the society, inas much as, if the Honorable Court fails to uphold the spirit of social engineering basedon the strong fundamental of a civilized society at the required time it will lead thedemocracy to cripple with directionless citizens. It is needless to state here that, incluster of judgments the judiciary has substantiated its competence and potential toprotect rights of individuals and deracinate such wrong acts from the society. Theproactive role of judiciary for welfare of citizens and as the guardian of the social valuescovers wide amplitude. It is further submitted that from the aforesaid facts andcircumstances it is clear that in respect of the subject matter of the present petition therespondents have apathetically failed to take appropriate steps and issuing necessarydirections to control the said show and the telecast of the video on the you tube, whichestablishes the indifference and insensitivity of the respondents to its mandatory dutiestowards the society and public at large. The petitioner respectfully submits that thereforeit is the need of hour that the Honourable Court should direct the respondents toeffectively control the permissions for such programs and implement the provisionsrequired for uploading videos on you tube at the earliest.

20. It is most humbly submitted that respecting the dignity of individuals in thesociety is an essential postulate of human civilization and hence it is indispensable torestrict the telecast of such shows on you tube in order to guide, strengthen and improvethe future generation of our nation. Today if such type of shows and unrestricted telecastof videos is not curtailed than it will percolate soon and be a part of the culture all overthe country, leaving behind the cherished values and norms of decency followed for sinceages in India.

21. That, the petitioner herein has no personal gain, private motive or oblique reasonin filing the present public interest litigation. The petitioner herein undertakes to pay costas ordered by the court, if it is ultimately held that the petition is frivolous or has beenfiled for extraneous consideration or that it lacks bonafides. The petitioner undertakesthat she will disclose the source of information leading to the filing of the public interestlitigation as and when called upon by the Court to do so.

22. That, the petitioners have approached this Honourable Court invoking theextraordinary, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for thepetitioners are left with no other alternate or equally efficacious remedy under law,especially in the present scenario that written complaints have been registered to makeout a cognizable offence against the respondents, yet no action has been taken against therespondents. Hence the petitioner is forced to knock the doors of the judiciary.

23. That, the petitioners have not filed any other proceeding nor her has approachedany other court including the Honourable Apex Court in relation to the subject matter ofthe present writ petition.

Hence this petition.

PRAYER: It is therefore prayed that by appropriatewrit, order or direction this Honourable Court may kindlybe pleased to:

(a) Exercise its Extra Ordinary Jurisdiction underArticle 226 of Constitution of India, in the peculiar factsand circumstances of the present case;

(b) Direct the Respondent No. 1 to verify the contentsand purpose of the program, which involves larger public

interest and to take appropriate action in respect thereof andalso to frame appropriate guidelines so as to ensurecontrolling and regulating holding of such programs on thebasis of permission to be granted by the authorities forsuch shows, in future, in the peculiar facts andcircumstances of the case;

(c) Issue appropriate writ, order or direction, exercisingthe powers of Honourable Court under Article 226 of theConstitution of India, thereby directing Respondents to takeappropriate steps, such as deputing some officials to checkthe details of such public shows etc., while the program isin action in order to monitor and regulate the program andto ensure that such incidences are not repeated in future;

(d) Direct the Respondent no. 2 to take appropriate andimmediate action against the person directly or indirectlyinvolved in holding the said show, using obscene, vulgarand indecent language in public and also uploading thevideo of the same for making it available to the public atlarge, in as much as in respect of these acts, cognizableoffences are made out;

(e) Order Respondent no. 3 to monitor the videosuploaded on the YouTube and restrict uploading suchvideos in future, which adversely affects the Public at large.

(f) And be further pleased to pass any such otherorder/s and grant such other reliefs as may be deemed fitand proper by this Honble Court in the facts andcircumstances of the instant case as well as in the interest

of justice.

AND FOR WHICH ACT OF KINDNESS THE

PETITIONERS SHALL REMAIN DUTY BOUND ANDEVER PRAY.

MUMBAIDATED :

PETITIONER

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER

SOLEMN AFFIRMATION

I, Dr. Sharmila W/o. Sandesh Ghuge, Aged about 42 years, Occupation: Service,R/o. B/102, Madhupuri Apts, Gokhale Road, Dahanurkarwadi, Kandivili (West),Mumbai- 400067, the petitioner No. 1 herein, do hereby take oath and state on solemnaffirmation as under :

1. That, I am the Petitioner No. 1 herein. I am aware of all the facts involved in thepresent matter.

2. That, the instant Petition is drafted by our counsel, as per our instructions and thesame has been read over and explained to me and has been understood by me.

3. That, the contents of paras 1 to above are true and correct to my personalknowledge and belief, as far as based on facts and the contents based on law, are asadvised to us by our lawyer, which I believe to be correct.

Hence, verified and signed at Mumbai on this 4th day of February 2015

Deponent

I know and identify the Deponent

Before Me

Advocate