New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday called it an “important concern” and sought responses from the Centre and others on a plea seeking a ban on streaming of sexually explicit content on OTT and social media platforms.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih said it was either for the legislature or the executive to come out with measures to deal with the issue.
“This is not within our domain. As it is, there is lot of allegation that we are encroaching upon the legislative and executive powers,” Justice Gavai said in an apparent reference to recent attacks on the judiciary.
Solicitor general Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, said the government would not take it as an adversarial litigation.
“Kindly monitor it here. We will come out with something which balances the freedom of speech while (Article) 19 (2) is taken care of,” he said.
Mehta said some of the contents were not only obscene but also “perverse”.
Though some regulations in this regard were in existence, he said, certain more were in contemplation.
Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, appearing for the petitioners, said it was not an adversarial litigation and the plea raised a serious concern over such contents on over-the-top (OTT) and social media.
Jain said such content was displayed without any checks or restrictions.
“Mr solicitor, you should do something,” Justice Gavai told Mehta.
The law officer said children were more exposed to all this nowadays.
“Some of the things which are in regular programmes, the language, the contents… is of such a nature that it is not only vulgar, it is perverse,” he said.
Mehta said some of the content was so perverse even two respectable men couldn’t sit and watch it together.
He said the only condition was that such programmes were for viewers aged over 18 years but cannot be controlled.
The bench referred to the use of cell phones by children.
“They (children) are quite adapt. It is a good thing, provided they reach the correct website,” Mehta said.
The bench observed, “On the last date itself, we had told him (Jain) that this is for either the legislature or the executive.”
The apparent reference was to the remarks of Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar and BJP MP Nishikant Dubey against the judiciary.
Dhankhar had questioned the judiciary setting a timeline for the president to make decisions and acting as a “super Parliament”, saying the Supreme Court cannot fire a “nuclear missile” at democratic forces.
Soon after, BJP MP Nishikant Dubey said Parliament and assemblies should be shut if the apex court had to make laws.
Mehta on Monday said something was needed to be done to deal with the issue.
When the bench offered to issue notice on the plea for responses from the Centre and others, including some OTT and social media platforms, Mehta said it may not be necessary to issue notice to others.
“Let them be before the court,” Justice Gavai said, “as they also have some social responsibility”.
“The present petition raises an important concern with regard to the display of various objectionable, obscene and indecent contents on OTT platforms and social media,” it recorded in its order.
The bench was hearing a plea filed by five petitioners who sought guidelines to constitute an authority to prohibit online dissemination of obscene content.
The plea claimed there were pages and profiles on social media sites sharing pornographic material without any filter and various OTT platforms were streaming content having potential elements of child pornography.
“Such sexually deviant material pollute the minds of youth, children and even grown up persons which gives rise to perverted and unnatural sexual tendencies thereby leading to an increase in the crime rate,” it said.
The plea said if left unchecked, the unregulated spread of obscene material could have severe consequences on societal values, mental health and public safety.
The petitioners claimed having made representations to the competent authorities to no avail.
The plea sought the Centre to stop access to social media and OTT platforms until they formulated a mechanism to bar access to pornographic content, especially to children in India.
The petitioners, therefore, urged the top court to constitute a committee headed by a retired apex court judge and experts in the field to oversee and certify for publishing or streaming content on the lines of the Central Board of Film Certification until a law is enacted to regulate it.
It also sought a panel of psychologists recognised by the Rehabilitation Council of India and other experts to conduct a nationwide study and submit a report on the adverse impact of sexually explicit content on people.
