5.7.2022 Since the complainant did not receive any response from the broadcaster within the period stipulated under the News Broadcasting Standards Regulation, the complainant on 18.7.2022 escalated the complaint to the second level i.e., NBDSA. Complaint dated 5.7.2022 The complainant stated that ABP Majha on 4.7. 2022 aired a news about a 25-year-old young man who died in a small village in Nagpur possibly due to overdose of stamina increasing pills when he was with his girlfriend at a lodge. While reporting the said news, the reporter also disclosed the name of the man who died. The complainant stated that the news media does not have any right to invade the privacy of the dead man and disclose his name to the world. This is a blatant violation of the person's privacy under Section 6 of the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards. The complainant stated that in view of the circumstances in which the person died that too in a small village, as a result of disclosure of his name, his family will have to live with social stigma and shame. People will mock his family for years. In small villages, this may even create problems for his family members' marriages. Further, the impugned broadcast was subsequently also released on the YouTube channel of ABP Majha. The complainant requested for a proper investigation in this matter and immediate action on those involved. Reply dated 25.8.2022 from broadcaster The broadcaster stated that the complainant had in the impugned broadcast and YouTube video covering a news story on the death of a 28 year old youth in Nagpur in connection with overdosing on stamina enhancing pills violated Section 6 of the Code of Ethics and Broadcasting Standards by disclosing the name of the deceased individual therein and purportedly violating the said individual’s privacy. The broadcaster stated that the said disclosure was undertaken in due public interest and is not in contravention of either Section 6 of the Code of Ethics or any other provision therein or any other law in force at the time of issuance of the aforesaid complaint. It is an established principle of law that there can be no defense of privacy in respect of information available in the public domain. The identity of the deceased individual along with his age and residential address was released to the public by the local police authorities of Nagpur on 4.7.2022. Therefore, the identity of the deceased individual was well circulated in the public domain. Consequently, Section 6 of the Code of Ethics did not apply in the instant case. Further, the broadcaster humbly submitted that for any violation of Section 6, to sustain, the necessary ingredients of salacious interest, children or kin interest must be met out, which were not applicable in the instant case. Accordingly, it stated that the aforesaid complaint bears no merit or basis and is liable to be dismissed.

28.10.2022
28.10.2022 NBDSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster, the transcript of the broadcast and the Press Note dated 4.7.2022 issued by Nagpur (Rural) police. NBDSA noted that the instant complaint arose from the disclosure of the identity of 28-year-old deceased youth in Nagpur, who died due to an alleged overdose of stamina enhancing pills. NBDSA observed that there was merit in the broadcaster’s submission that since the identity of the deceased individual along with his age and residential address were released to the public by the Nagpur police authorities vide press release dated 4.7.2022. and in view of the fact that the identity of the deceased individual was already available in the public domain and the impugned broadcast was aired in public interest, there was no violation of the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards in the impugned broadcast. NBDSA accordingly decided to close the complaint with the above observations and inform the complainant and the broadcaster accordingly.

2/8.7.2022 Since the complainant did not receive a response from the broadcaster within the period stipulated under the NBDSA Regulations, the complainant vide email dated 17.7.2022 escalated the complaint to the second level of grievance redressal i.e., NBDSA. Complaint dated 8.7.2022 The complaint is in respect of the following two news reports aired on 1.7.2022 on Zee 24 Taas. In the programme titled “Trimbakeshwar Jyotirling | ????????????? ??????????? ??????? ????, ??????? ???????? ????????? ????” . The reporter promoted superstitious beliefs by stating that since the past 2-4 years, such miracles were being seen around this pind, including the formation of water bubbles and ant-hill sand around the pind. In another programme titled “???????! ?????????????????? ?????????? ??????? ????, ??????? ?????? ??????? , an interview of the temple priest who made superstitious claims about the "miraculous" occurrence of an ice ball in the pind inside the temple was broadcast. Further, the impugned news reports were aired without a disclaimer warning viewers that a) the ice found in the temple was not a miracle, b) that ice can only be formed naturally at 0 degree Celsius, c) that the temperature in Nashik was not 0 degrees Celsius or under or even close to 0, d) that such acts are punishable under the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013, e) that it is the Fundamental Duty of every Indian citizen to develop scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform The complainant stated that he believed that the broadcaster had by airing the above news reports violated the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards and the Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage, which state as under: - “8. Refraining from advocating or encouraging superstition and occultism: News channels will not broadcast any material that glorifies superstition and occultism in any manner. In broadcasting any news about such genre, news channels will also issue public disclaimers to ensure that viewers are not misled into believing or emulating such beliefs and activity. Therefore news channels will not broadcast “as fact” myths about “supernatural” acts, apparitions and ghosts, personal or social deviations or deviant behaviour, and recreations of the same. Wherever references are made to such cases, news channels will issue on air riders/disclaimers/warnings to ensure that such beliefs or events are not passed off “as fact” since they can hurt rational sensibilities. D. Subjects which promote horror, supernatural, superstition, occultism, exorcism, divination, and the paranormal should be avoided. 7. Supernatural, Occultism & Paranormal 7.2 Belief in superstition, occultism, exorcism, divination and the paranormal should not be promoted.” Reply dated 17.7.2022 from broadcaster The broadcaster stated that it is in the complaints dated 2.7.2022 and 8.7.2022, the complainant had raised various false, misleading, frivolous and motivated allegations against the contents of its programmes aired on Zee 24 Taas on 01.07.2022. In the impugned broadcast, it had reported the viral video of Ice on Shivpind in Trimbakeshwar and conducted the interview with the priest of the said Temple. In reply to the contents of the complaint, the broadcaster stated as under:- 1. The broadcaster denied each allegation, averments and insinuations levelled in the complaints under reply, as the same were false, frivolous, unfounded, and misleading. 2. The present complaint was not maintainable as the impugned programmes did not violate any of the Guidelines and Code of Ethics. The impugned programmes were completely neutral, objective, and impartial and as such, the present complaint was nothing but an attempt on the part of the complainant to muzzle the voice of a responsible media from reporting the truthful account of important facts and events. The allegations levelled in the subject complaint were completely baseless and motivated. The contents of the impugned programmes were never intended to glorify the superstitious practices in any manner. The intent of the impugned programmes was to serve the people with news, views, comments and information surrounding geographical phenomena of the appearance of iceberg in Trimbakeshwar Temple in Nashik, in public interest and an attempt to resolve the rumours surrounding the same. As a responsible media house of the country, it had reported the beliefs of the local priest in a fair, accurate, unbiased, sober and decent manner. The impugned programmes were telecasted in public interest to undertake inquiry into the local claims by the priest and other residents in charge of the upkeep of the said Temple. 3. That the impugned programmes did not support, purport, affirm or encourage any superstitious claim made by the priest. While the priest was interviewed on the impugned programmes, his claims were not portrayed as facts but only as mere statements, with no authority attached or accorded to them. Further, at no instance in the impugned programmes were the claims made by the priest justified or affirmed to create an impression of the verity of the same. It is in fact highlighted at multiple points in the report that an investigation into the claims so made is being undertaken to seek and provide scientific justification for the same. 4. That in the impugned programmes ‘Trimbakeshwar Jyotirling | ????????????? ??????????? ??????? ????, ??????? ???????? ????????? ????’ dated 01.07.2022 and ‘???????! ?????????????????? ?????????? ??????? ????, ??????? ?????? ??????? ? Tryambakeshwar ICE’ dated 1.7.2022 it had merely pointed out the facts about the geographical phenomenon surrounding the pind which in no way justified or affirmed the claims made by the priest therein. The re-iteration of the previous history of unusual occurrences at the said temple was accompanied with the call for a scientific investigation of the same to provide plausible reasons. It had not accepted the claims made by the locals as the justifiable truth and its reporter in the impugned programme continued to probe into the phenomenon and highlight the continuing investigation in relation to the same. 5. That the impugned programmes did not intend to mislead the viewers into believing or promoting belief in the claims made by the priest. The impugned programmes continuously referred to the use of CCTV footage in finding out the actual reason behind the unnatural occurrence at the said Temple and did not affirm or insinuate any acceptance of such claims as occurrence of a miracle. The statements of the anti-superstition committee highlighting the formation of the pind as a completely natural process had also been broadcast in the impugned programmes. Further, the impugned programmes balanced the claims made by the priest in the interview with neutral statements highlighting the investigation and inquiry being carried out into the claims made with respect to the phenomenon in question. It had neither suggested any facts which may showcase accuracy or truth in the narrative of the speakers, nor had it showcased any bias by supporting their opinions or re-affirming them in any manner whatsoever. 6. That the impugned programmes aim to promote inquiry and investigation in furtherance of Article 51A (h) of the Constitution of India and did not solidify any superstitious belief or made remarks validating the superstitious comments and beliefs as claimed by the Priest. Staying silent in the wake of viral news and videos which could potentially spread misinformation is against the general interest of the public and it was the discretion of news channels and reporters to address such events and balance the superfluous claims of “miracles” by engaging in an informed inquiry and adequately representing the bodies and individuals who claim against the nature of such alleged “miracles”. 7. It is vehemently denied that the aforesaid reporting is in violation of the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards and the Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage. The reporter did not pose any questions to the priest with the intent of promoting superstition, as alleged in the complaint. It was the intent of the reporter to seek clarity on the claims and the rumours attached to them. A mere inquiry into the nature and history of the claims should not be construed as amounting to promotion, encouragement, glorification, or affirmation of the same. Broadcaster stated that it had neither breached the Code of Ethics and Broadcasting Standards nor was it in violation of the Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage, as alleged in the complaint. Further, the impugned programmes did not mention or broadcast any content identifiable under Section 2 (1) (b) of the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013. The Act lays down a list of practices, the display, publication, and propagation of which constitutes a violation of the Act. However, the impugned programmes did not contain any references to a person possessing otherworldly or supernatural or unnatural powers which brought about the phenomenon, nor did it use any representation of a similar nature to justify the same. Complaint dated 18.7.2022 to NBDSA The complainant stated that the channel in its response denied the alleged violations. The channel stated that it did not promote superstition or affirm the claims about the “super natural” occurrences in the temple , however, it can been clearly seen in the video that the on-ground reporter said that such “miracles” have been taking place in the same temple. The channel further tried to associate the “miracle” with the Amarnath Yatra, thereby promoting superstition through these speculations about the causes of the ice formation. That while the channel had in its response stated that it had broadcast statements of the Anti-superstition committee in the impugned news reports however he had failed to see these statements in the broadcasts. Further, the channel has stated in its response and in the reports that it will inform the users about the findings from the CCTV footage however the channel never followed up on this story to reveal the truth. The complainant stated that for the reasons stated above, he was not satisfied with the response of the channel and therefore, he escalated the complaint to the next level.

28.10.2022
28.10.2022 NBDSA considered the complaint and response from the broadcaster. NBDSA noted that the impugned broadcast was in respect of the alleged ice formation on the Shivpind inside the Trimbakeshwar temple in Nasik, Maharashtra. NBDSA observed that in the impugned news reports, the broadcaster had merely reported on the alleged formation of ice on the Shivling and had not made any claims regarding its veracity or broadcast the same as a matter of fact. However, the broadcaster had failed to issue a rider/disclaimer/warning to the viewers in the impugned broadcast as stipulated under the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards (“Code of Ethics”). In view of the above, NBDSA decided to bring to the notice of the broadcaster Clause 9 of the Code of Ethics, which require broadcasters to “not broadcast any material that glorifies superstition and occultism in any manner. In broadcasting any news about such genre, news channels will also issue public disclaimers to ensure that viewers are not misled into believing or emulating such beliefs and activity. Therefore, news channels will not broadcast “as fact” myths about “supernatural” acts, apparitions and ghosts, personal or social deviations or deviant behaviour, and recreations of the same. Wherever references are made to such cases, news channels will issue on air riders/disclaimers/warnings to ensure that such beliefs or events are not passed off “as fact” since they can hurt rational sensibilities. NBDSA cautioned the broadcaster and observed that in future the broadcaster would be well advised to bear in mind and abide by Clause 9 of the Code of Ethics and the Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage while airing any news reports or programmes on events or topic of such nature. NBDSA decided to close the complaint with the above observations and inform the complainant and the broadcaster accordingly.

2/8.7.2022 Complaint dated 8.7.2022 The complaint was in respect of three news reports broadcast on News18 Lokmat titled “Nashik Trimbakeshwar Temple : ????????????????? ??????? ?????? ????? ????????? ????, ???????? ????”; “Nashik Trimbakeshwar Temple : ??????????? ??????? ???? ??? ???????? ???????? ????” and “Nashik Trimbakeshwar Temple : ??????????? ??????? ???? ???, ????????????? ????????? VIDEO ????” aired on 1.7.2022. The above superstitious reports by News 18 Lokmat are about an alleged "miraculous" occurrence of an ice globe inside a shiv-pind, in a temple in Nashik. The channel interviewed the temple priest, who made unscientific and superstitious claims that he had to "request" the ice globe to get out of the idol and only then it came out. The priest made other claims about similar "miracles" that occurred in the past, namely during the Indo-China war. He further claimed that when such a miracle happens, either something good or something bad can happen. The interviewer continued to entertain such claims and responded in affirmative with words like, "barobar", "bara", "barr", "achcha", "ho", "haan" -- all meaning yes or okay. The interviewer asked leading questions, promoting superstition, like, "This is being linked to Assam floods, is there really some relation of this to that?", "Were you able to remove the ice ball easily or were you able to remove it only after requesting it?" and "Have such things happened in the past, have you heard about such ice being formed in the pind from your elders?" during the programme. Further, the above reports did not have disclaimers warning viewers that a) the ice found in the temple was not a miracle, b) that ice can only be formed naturally at 0 degree celsius, c) that the temperature in Nashik was not 0 degrees celsius or under or even close to 0, d) that such acts are punishable under the Maharashtra Prevention and Eradication of Human Sacrifice and other Inhuman, Evil and Aghori Practices and Black Magic Act, 2013, e) that it is the Fundamental Duty of every Indian citizen to develop scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform By airing the above reports, the complainant believed that the broadcaster had violated the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards and the Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage, which state as under: - “8. Refraining from advocating or encouraging superstition and occultism: News channels will not broadcast any material that glorifies superstition and occultism in any manner. In broadcasting any news about such genre, news channels will also issue public disclaimers to ensure that viewers are not misled into believing or emulating such beliefs and activity. Therefore news channels will not broadcast “as fact” myths about “supernatural” acts, apparitions and ghosts, personal or social deviations or deviant behaviour, and recreations of the same. Wherever references are made to such cases, news channels will issue on air riders/disclaimers/warnings to ensure that such beliefs or events are not passed off “as fact” since they can hurt rational sensibilities. D. Subjects which promote horror, supernatural, superstition, occultism, exorcism, divination, and the paranormal should be avoided. 7. Supernatural, Occultism & Paranormal 7.2 Belief in superstition, occultism, exorcism, divination and the paranormal should not be promoted.” Reply dated 11.7.2022 by broadcaster The broadcaster denied all the allegations made in complaint and clarified that its programmes were entirely consistent with the applicable Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards, Guidelines/Advisories and applicable laws. The purpose of the reports about formation of ice on the Shiva pind was not to promote superstition of miracles but on the contrary was to inform the public not to believe in them. The same is clear from the portion of the byte of Sh. Krishna Chandgude, who is member Andhashradha Nirmulan Samiti, who stated that their Samiti has proved that miracles do not happen. This phenomenon occurs due to climate change or low temperatures where low temperatures at night cause depressions to accumulate in many places in the morning. It is possible that it may have accumulated that way. The fact that the channel had aired this byte clearly shows that the purpose of the report was to inform the public not to trust rumours about miracles. In the programme, it was specifically clarified that the Andhashradha Nirmulan Samiti is appealing to the devotees not to believe in claims of miracles due to the said incident, which shows that it had specifically appealed to the viewers not to believe in rumours of miracles. To balance the report and take views of all concerned it had taken the byte of Mr. Satyapriya Shukla, trustee of the temple, who had given his own versions and claimed that this phenomenon is linked to bad happenings. The broadcaster reiterated that even though its view was to balance the report by having versions by having versions of all concerned, it did not subscribe to the view of Mr. Satyapriya Shukla. To buttress this, it had also carried out the version of scientist, Mr. Milind Deshmukh, who specifically stated that it is a crime in Maharashtra to propagate and spread miracles and if anyone is doing so, they demand the administration to take action against them. As a responsible channel, it had tried to put the facts before the public while also informing them not to believe in miracles and rumours. Its interest in telecasting the impugned reports was in effectively disseminating newsworthy material to the public at large which concerned their opinions and well-being while also informing them not to believe in rumours and instead look at the phenomena in scientific manner. Further reply dated 17.7.2022 from complainant: The complainant stated that the channel in its response had stated that it had interviewed and aired comments by a member of the Andhashraddha Nirmoolan Samiti, Shri Krishna Chandgude and scientist, Mr. Milind Deshmukh who opposed the occurrence of a miracle in the said temple. However, none of the three news reports impugned in the complaint have the scientific comments made by Mr. Deshmukh or Mr. Chandgude. The impugned videos only have comments by the anchor and the temple priest who are both giving out a message to the audience that a miracle has indeed occurred.

28.10.2022
28.10.2022 NBDSA considered the complaint and response from the broadcaster. NBDSA noted that the impugned broadcast was in respect of the alleged ice formation on the Shivpind inside the Trimbakeshwar temple in Nasik, Maharashtra. NBDSA observed that in the impugned news reports, the broadcaster had merely reported on the alleged formation of ice on the Shivling and had not made any claims regarding its veracity or broadcast the same as a matter of fact. However, the broadcaster had failed to issue a rider/disclaimer/warning to the viewers in the impugned broadcast as stipulated under the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards (“Code of Ethics”). In view of the above, NBDSA decided to bring to the notice of the broadcaster Clause 9 of the Code of Ethics, which require broadcasters to “not broadcast any material that glorifies superstition and occultism in any manner. In broadcasting any news about such genre, news channels will also issue public disclaimers to ensure that viewers are not misled into believing or emulating such beliefs and activity. Therefore, news channels will not broadcast “as fact” myths about “supernatural” acts, apparitions and ghosts, personal or social deviations or deviant behaviour, and recreations of the same. Wherever references are made to such cases, news channels will issue on air riders/disclaimers/warnings to ensure that such beliefs or events are not passed off “as fact” since they can hurt rational sensibilities. NBDSA cautioned the broadcaster and observed that in future the broadcaster would be well advised to bear in mind and abide by Clause 9 of the Code of Ethics and the Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage while airing any news reports or programmes on events or topic of such nature. NBDSA decided to close the complaint with the above observations and inform the complainant and the broadcaster accordingly.

11.7.2022 The complaint related to distorted reporting by the media of the Gyanvapi case.

28.10.2022
28.10.2022 NBDSA considered the complaint and decided to close the complaint. in the absence of details pertaining to the broadcast/s i.e., the date, time and name of the channel(s) which are required to be provided under the NBDSA Regulation,

24.3.2022 The complaint is against the broadcast hosted by Aman Chopra on 16th March 2022 on his primetime show titled Desh Nahin Jhukne Denge ?????? ?? ?? ?????, '?????? ????' ??????? On News18 India. According to the complainant the anchor during the show violated (1) Guidelines No 3 of guidelines to prevent communal color in reporting crime, riots, rumors and such related incidents; (2) Fundamental principle number 4 and (3) Principle number 1,2 of self regulation regarding impartiality and objectivity in reporting and ensuring neutrality respectively.

31.5.2022
31.5.2022The complaint was dismissed as it had as it was barred by limitation . The complaint was filed beyond the period of seven days from the date of the first broadcast as prescribed under Regulation 8.1.6. and was consequently ..

25.1.2022 The complaint is against the broadcast hosted by Mr. Aman Chopra on 18.1.2022 titled Desh Nahin Jhukne Denge. The complainant alleged that throughout the debate, the anchor repeatedly asserted that providing tickets to individuals who give provocative speeches is an indication of hatred towards Hindus, thus making an attempt to promote one side of a very controversial and polarizing issue. The entire debate was a model exercise in political mudslinging and the anchor through his statements, made it clear which side of the debate he supported. Reply dated 8.2.2022 from the Broadcaster Broadcaster, stated they decided to debate on this topic since there were recent incidents/statements made by certain people against a particular community (‘Hindus’), and these people were chosen by certain political parties for standing in elections. The debate questioned and let the public decide if people making the above kind of statements should be chosen as representatives of people by political parties. Thus, in a way, the show emphasized the need to have politics which is clean from religious issues and instead being one which promotes peace and harmony.

31.5.2022
31.5.2022 NBDSA considered the application seeking condonation of delay filed by the complainant and the response thereof received from the broadcaster. NBDSA noted that the complainant had failed to satisfactorily explain or show sufficient cause for the delay of 35 days in escalating the complaint to the second level in respect of the programme, which was broadcast on 18.01.2022 .In view of the above, NBDSA decided to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it was filed beyond the period of limitation permitted under the Regulations. NBDSA decided to inform the complainant and the broadcaster accordingly.

17.2.2022 The Joint Director, ECI, vide letter dated 17.2.2022 drew the attention of NBDSA to a video of Shri. T Raja, MLA, wherein he may be seen threatening voters to vote in favour of a particular candidate, was being broadcast on various news channels. The Commission has considered this video as a violation of provisions of MCC, Section 171C & Section 171F of the India Penal Code (IPC). Further, as per Guideline No 9 of NBSA guidelines dated 3rd March, 2014 (also reiterated by ECI vide Press Note dt. 14.1.2022), News broadcasters must not broadcast any form of ‘hate speech’ or other obnoxious content that may lead to incitement of violence or promote public unrest or disorder as election campaigning based on communal or caste factors is prohibited under Election Rules. News Broadcasters should strictly avoid reports which tend to promote feelings of enmity or hatred among people, on the ground of religion, race, caste, community, region or language. As the video is violating NBDSA guidelines for election broadcast and interfering with the free exercise of the electoral right, NBDSA was requested to direct news channels not to promote/broadcast this video further through their platforms, including social media. Reply dated 4.3.2022 from the broadcaster Broadcaster, in response, submitted that in compliance with the advisory issued by the Election Commission of India and NBSA Guidelines, it had circulated the same among TVTN editorial teams with the direction to stop and remove the said broadcast of Mr. T. Raja. The relevant video footage was also submitted to NBDSA for its perusal and record. Broadcaster also confirmed that all the videos of the broadcast, as mentioned in the letter from the ECI had been removed from TVTN platforms.

31.5.2022
31.5.2022 NBDSA considered the complaint and the response of the broadcaster. NBDSA noted that since the broadcaster had taken corrective action by complying with the direction of the ECI and removed the videos of the broadcast from TVTN platforms upon it being brought to its notice, no further action was required on the complaint. NBDSA decided to close the complaint and inform the ECI and the broadcaster accordingly.

5.2.2022 The complaint is that during a TV program on 1st February 2022 at 15:5 hrs, Shri Ravish Kumar made a damning statement that “80% ????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???” in reference to the Union Budget 2022-2023 presented by the Union Government. This malicious and unsubstantiated claim of Shri Ravish Kumar is in clear violation of the Guidelines issued by the Press Council of India as well as the Model Code of Conduct promulgated by the Election Commission of India. In the wake of the ongoing assembly general elections, these absurd, mischievous and malafide comments of Shri Ravish Kumar on NDTV channel are to denigrate the ruling party at the centre, i.e., Bharatiya Janata Party. The scathing statement made by Mr. Ravish Kumar was nothing but a third-party propaganda from the platform of a national-level news channel, thwarting the free and fair election process in the name of freedom of press. Reply dated 25.2.2022 from the broadcaster Broadcaster submitted that on June 6, 2021, the Government announced that it would distribute free ration to around 80 crore people till Diwali for providing relief to the poor amid the second wave of Covid-19. On November 24, 2021, the Government extended the scheme till March 2022 on account of continuing circumstances warranting the requirement to provide free ration to 80 crore beneficiaries. As is made clear by the Government announcement, the decision was taken based on the requirement of the free ration for this number of people. It was in this context based on the Government announcement, that the anchor raised apertinent question for consideration of the audience after the budget speech that “80% ????? ?? ??? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????, ????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ???”. The complaint is devoid of any merit; there is no violation of the Code of Ethics and Broadcasting Standard of News Broadcasting Standards Authority or any violation of the model code of conduct on account of raising this pertinent question. Broadcaster stated that the complaint is ex-facie misdirected and misinformed.

31.5.2022
31.5.2022 NBDSA considered the complaint and response from the broadcaster. NBDSA noted that the content of the broadcast fell within the realm of editorial discretion and it found no violation of its Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards and/or Guidelines in regard to the said broadcast. NBDSA decided that no action was called for on the complaint and decided to close the complaint and inform the broadcaster and the complainant accordingly.

28.4.2022 The complainant stated that one of the panellists, Mr. Sambit Patra quoted Bal Thackeray in the impugned programme. Mr. Patra stated that Thackeray is “hindu hriday Samrat” (king of Hindu hearts) because of the words that he used for the Congress party. He asked the anchor to show the quote on TV. Then Mr. Patra stated the quote, “Sonia ke aage Hijade jhukte hai”. The term “Hijade” refers to a marginalised minority community within the transgender community in South Asia. Bal Thackeray had used the term “Hijade” as a transphobic slur to insult members of the Congress Party. Mr. Sambit Patra quoted Mr. Thackeray using the same term in a transphobic manner, with the same purpose of insulting the Congress Party members. He further asked the anchor to specifically air the quote. As per the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights Act), 2019, Chapter 8, Section 18(d), any verbal, mental or emotional abuse of transgender persons is punishable for 6-24 months and a fine. Using transphobic slurs on national news channels normalises the use of such slurs and causes immense harm to the LGBTQIA+ community, especially the transgender community, more specifically to LGBTQIA+ minors and youths. Transphobia leads to unimaginable forms of abuse leading to death by suicide as well as death by transphobic physical assaults. The complainant stated that despite Mr. Patra’s blatant promotion of transphobia, the anchor failed to condemn the use of the transphobic slur. When it comes to hate speech, choosing to remain silent is equivalent to endorsing hate speech. The complainant stated that Mr. Patra was not merely quoting Mr. Thackeray, but he supported Thackeray’s transphobic speech, he repeated it multiple times, he asked the anchor to air it, he quoted it specifically to insult his opposition members, thereby making it clear that he, in no way, was condemning the use of the slur and further he called Mr. Thackeray, ruler of the Hindu hearts for using such words. Therefore, it is evident that Mr. Patra endorsed Mr. Thackeray’s transphobic speech and repeated it himself for similar purpose. By failing to condemn Mr. Patra’s transphobic speech and airing it on live tv as well as on all digital assets, the broadcaster had violated NBDSA’s policies around children’s interests, good taste and decency, spreading acrimony, defamation and corrigendum. Response dated 10.5.2022 from broadcaster The broadcaster stated that Halla Bol is a debate show where politicians are frequently invited to debate certain topics of national interest. It is an unscripted, unedited, live news programme where the guests/panelists advance their ideas and political ideologies. The guests are solely responsible for the statements made by them and the channel cannot possibly control or edit the assertions made by them during a live recording. The broadcaster stated that that it holds immense respect for the transgender community and that it does not, under any circumstance, subscribe to such language as used by Mr. Patra or endorse such opinions. It is never its intention to demean, derogate or offend any community through its shows or otherwise, in any manner whatsoever. The broadcaster submitted that in the show, Mr. Sambit Patra apparently quoted Late Bal Saheb Thackery and made an objectionable and transphobic statement and also urged the anchor to display it on the screen. However, it neither advanced nor encouraged the statement on the channel, rather the anchor immediately dismissed the argument being made by Mr. Patra and the channel put forth Shiv Sena’s representative, Mr. Kishore Tiwari, to counter Mr. Patra. So, while it may agree that the statement made by Mr. Patra was in poor taste and offensive to the transgender community, it vehemently denies the preposterous allegation of supporting his stand. Mr. Pawan Khera, the spokesperson for Congress in the debate, was also vocal in countering Mr. Patra along with Mr. Tiwari. Thus, everyone present on the debate panel altogether countered Mr. Patra’s argument and no one was in consonance of the statement he made, including the anchor. With reference to “Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights Act), 2019, Chapter 8, Section 18(d), any verbal, mental or emotional abuse of transgender persons is punishable for 6-24 months and a fine” and “…such slurs and cause immense harm to the LGBTQIA+ community”, the broadcaster stated that the quote in question was purportedly first made by Late Bal Saheb Thackery and then repeated verbatim by Mr. Patra on the show. It believes that the offenders of hate speech are the ones that actually make the speech. The legal provisions mentioned by the complainant are also only applicable on the people who are responsible for and practice such hate speech. Throughout the complaint, the complainant has made Mr. Patra to be allegedly culpable of hate speech. It would like to reiterate that the statements made by experts/politicians in such shows are their personal opinions made by them in their personal capacity.

31.5.2022
31.5.2022 NBDSA considered the complaint, the response dated 10.5.2022 received from the broadcaster and the counter reply of the complainant. The Authority noted that there were several panelists whom the broadcaster had invited for the debate and that the comments made by one of the panelists, Mr. Sambit Patra, related to a quote by Mr. Bal Thackeray. Furthermore, time was given by the anchor to the other panelists to express or counter the views of Mr. Patra. In view of the above, NBDSA found no violation of the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards or Guidelines in the broadcast. NBDSA, therefore, decided to close the complaint and inform the complainant and the broadcaster accordingly.

22.12.2021 The complainant escalated the complaint to the second level of redressal as he had not received any response from the broadcaster. The complaint relates to the programme "Kaalathin Kural" aired on News18 Tamil Nadu on 21.12.2021 at 7 PM. The debate program was on the latest legislation of Aadhar linking with the Voter Id. The debate was conducted without proper balance of the panellists. Only one political party was given space. One of the panellist’s introduced as a journalist was seen raising suspicion on the new legislation and the ruling party and no balance could be seen in countering, which appeared to be a hidden agenda of the channel. He stated that there was fear-mongering about the new legislation, and this has been going on in almost all debates concerning the Government of India. The journalist, who has been known for his extreme views, was still allowed to spread misinformation to create fear among minorities with an agenda. The programme failed to report the truth or educate the viewer on the proposed legislation and instead spread misinformation. There was no balance in the selection of panellists. It violated the principles of impartiality & objectivity in reporting and ensuring neutrality. Reply dated 19.1.2022 from the broadcaster The broadcaster submitted that the show was not about creating fear-mongering but about having a healthy discussion among the panellists. Since both BJP and AIADMK political parties in the state of Tamil Nadu have announced as their policy decision that their representatives will not participate in any debate shows organized by the television channels, they invited people from all walks of life having different ideologies, i.e., such as sympathisers of various parties along with like-minded journalists to ensure balance amongst the panellists. Broadcaster stated that it is amply clear that people from all walks of life were invited for the discussion, and there was no question of the debate being biased throughout the program. Also, it is incorrect to allege that the program was conducted without proper balance of the panellist. In fact, as stated above, this was done in order to ensure impartiality, objectivity and neutrality in the show.

31.5.2022
31.5.2022 NBDSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster and the translated script of the broadcast from Tamil to English. NBDSA noted that both BJP & AIDMK had announced that their representatives would not participate in any debate shows organized by the television channels. The broadcaster therefore, invited other well-known persons, including the former Election Commissioner and a retired judge, to the debate on the latest legislation linking Aadhar with the Voter Id. NBDSA noted that the debate was conducted in a balanced manner with well-known persons on the panel. Therefore, NBDSA found no violation of the Code of Ethics and Broadcasting Standards or the Guidelines in the broadcast. NBDSA decided to close the complaint and inform the complainant and the broadcaster accordingly.