Decisions

S.NO Channel Complainant Date of Broadcast Complaint Decisions
S.NO 21. Channel News18 Lokmat Complainant Mr. Dhananjay Mundey Date of Broadcast 28.2.2018 Complaint

Complaint: The Legal notice issued on behalf of Mr. Dhananjay Munde stated that on 28.2.2018 the channel, ran a news report under the caption ‘Is commission taken for asking questions in the Legislature.’ That while airing the said show under the title “Maha Gopya Sphot (Big revelation)” the channel showed a telephonic conversation between one Pramod Dalvi and one Pramod Purandare who was working with a real estate / construction company named HDIL’ that the entire attempt of the channel in airing the said telephonic conversation and interview of Pramod Dalvi was to make out that his client Shri. Dhananjay Munde received monetary benefits for not raising a question pertaining to HDIL Construction company in the Maharashtra Legislature; that the aforesaid news item also suggested that the question pertaining to HDIL company will not be highlighted and they would remain as non-starred questions; that while airing the aforesaid news report, reference was made to one ‘Calling attention motion’ raised in Maharashtra Legislative Council by his client and one other person (Shri. Anand Thakur, MLC); that the said calling attention motion was neither related to HDIL nor to any project implemented by HDIL; that despite the said Calling Attention motion being completely unrelated to HDIL, it was shown as if it is related to HDIL and thereby suggesting to the viewers that his client purportedly took money for not highlighting the said Calling attention motion pertaining to HDIL. It was alleged that the entire report was mischievous, intended to defame and malign his client without verifying the facts of the said calling attention motion. Response from Broadcaster: The broadcaster in its reply stated that Ms. Prajakta Pol-Shinde, the Channel News18 Lokmat’s Reporter on Congress–NCP Beat was approached by a person called Pramod Dalvi in the month of February 2018; that Mr. Dalvi told her that he has few audio clips which contained conversations regarding money being paid to politicians and legislators in respect of a “deal” on a ‘Calling Attention Motion’ in the Maharashtra Legislative Council relating to violations made by HDIL Builders in a real estate project in Vasai–Virar; that Mr. Dalvi further claimed that the conversation in the audio clips was between Mr. Dhananjay Gawade, a Corporator of Shiv Sena and the then Managing Director of HDIL, Mr. Pramod Purandare. Mr. Dalvi also claimed that he was himself the middle-man between the builder and the politicians in the alleged deal; that since the allegations made by Mr. Dalvi were of immense public importance and went to the very root of legislative functioning in Maharashtra, he was asked to share the clips with the Channel and also explain the matter in detail; that accordingly, on 23.02.2018, Mr. Dalvi shared two audio clips with the channel; that in the said clips, a conversation is heard, allegedly between Mr. Dhananjay Gawade, Mr. Pramod Purandare and Mr. Dalvi himself. that reporters were placed for obtaining the responses and reactions of Mr. Dhananjay Munde, Mr. Anand Thakur, Mr. Anant Karle and Mr. Ajit Kawade on the said audio clips and story; that thereafter - presumably pursuant to having been advised not to avoid the media – Mr. Dhanjay Munde called the broadcaster’s office and stated that he wanted to present his side over the live-phoner to the channel; that live-phoner was readily aired along with the said telecast between 18.42 hrs to 18.48 hrs.; that despite efforts, the channel could not reach Mr. Anant Kalse and Mr. Ajit Kawade but it did get a response from Mr. Anand Thakur live which was also aired in the same programme / story; that in fact, as will be clear from the recording and transcript of the programme/ story in question that Mr. Dalvi was confronted live on air and Mr. Dalvi repeated his allegations and despite being severely questioned by the anchor; that the version of the complainant was duly telecast prominently along with the audio clips and the allegations made by Mr. Dalvi; and that likewise, the version of Mr. Dhananjay Gawade was also telecast in the same programme.

Decisions

30.10.2018
NBSA considered the complaint, response of the broadcaster and also viewed the broadcast. NBSA does not verify the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made in any news report and if complainant wants to take any action for defamation, he should do so before the appropriate forum. In so far as the Regulations or Guidelines of NBSA, NBSA noted that the complainant was given due opportunity to present his side over the live-phoner to the channel and there was no violation of the Regulations/Guidelines. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform the complainant and the broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 22. Channel News Nation Complainant Mr. Prabhat Agarwal Date of Broadcast 2.6.2018 Complaint

Complaint: The complaint against the news channel “News Nation” is that while showing the live interview of former Pakistan Army General and former President Mr. Pervez Musharraf from Dubai 2nd June 2018 at around quarter past nine, the news channel was repeatedly showing different photos and different videos of terrorist Osama bin Laden which tantamounted to indulging in his glorification. The complainant stated that the broadcast was an infringement of the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards Section 2 Principles of self regulation Category 3 Reporting of crime and safeguards to ensure crime and violence are not glorified. Response from Broadcaster: Broadcaster in their reply stated that it is wrong to presume that by displaying the still photographs and videos of the terrorist Osama Bin Laden, they were trying to glorify the heinous activities that Osama Bin Laden had perpetrated throughout the World; that the interview conducted with Mr. Parvez Musharraf from Dubai by their Managing Editor was a comprehensive interview that dealt with nearly every facet of Mr. Parvez Musharraf’s life (including but not limited to the recent order of the Supreme Court of Pakistan against him; the Kargil war; his interview with the Voice of America; the rise of China; ceasefire in Kashmir; insurgency & terrorism in Kashmir due to Pakistan; the living conditions of Mujahirs in Pakistan, etc.); that it was during the discussion on Kashmir insurgency that the reference to the recent book ‘The Spy Chronicles: RAW, ISI and the Illusion of Peace’ by Mr. Aditya Sinha and Mr. Asad Durrani came up for discussion; that in order to make the viewers aware of the contents of the book, the interviewer referred to some pertinent paragraphs of the book that dealt with the Kashmir insurgency due to Pakistan and the attack by United States of America on Pakistan that resulted in the death of Osama Bin Laden; that the whole line of discussion pertained to the death of Osama Bin Laden at the hands of United States of America and questions were put forth before Mr. Parvez Musharraf as to how could a nation be trusted on its pledges to fight terrorism, when a dreaded terrorist such as Osama was hiding within Pakistani territory.

Decisions

30.10.2018
NBSA considered the complaint, response of the broadcaster and also viewed the broadcast. NBSA found no violation of the Regulations or Guidelines of NBSA. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform the complainant and the broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 23. Channel Republic TV Complainant Mr. Sharad Shah Date of Broadcast 3.6.2018 Complaint

Complaint: Complainant alleges that the programme "Grand Alliance Vs Modi” was shown on 2.6.2018; and that thereafter the telecast was repeated from 12 am to 2 pm and from 9 pm to 11pm on 3.6.2018 with the “live” tag, in violation of the “Revised Advisory” dated 10.1.2014 on the use of caption “Live”. Response from broadcaster The broadcaster stated that ‘Live’ tag display norms does not necessarily mean that each and every portion of the broadcast was ‘live’; that the ‘live’ tag will be present whenever ‘life’ elements come on the screen; that the broadcast at those times had carried additional news elements in the bottom of the screen like social media tracks (Twitter tracks), forthcoming newsbreak information etc., which were dynamic elements. The programme was broadcast first time only on June 3, at 12 noon and was re-telecasted at 9 pm (with the screen having dynamic news elements as above) and repeated at 11 pm (without a dynamic element). Broadcaster denied that the programme was aired on 2.6.2018. The broadcaster also stated that the ‘practice of depicting the LIVE ‘bug’ whenever there are some active and dynamic elements on display in the screen, while a news story or current affairs topic is being broadcasted, is also followed by other News Broadcasters in India and is not unique or a new practice.’

Decisions

30.10.2018
NBSA considered the complaint and the response and found the explanation given by broadcaster not satisfactory. NBSA noted that very often, member news channels are using the caption “live” in the course of their broadcasts in a manner that is misleading and mixing LIVE and RECORDED feed is deceptive to the viewers. NBSA therefore decided to circulate a Revised advisory on use of caption “live” to the broadcaster for strict compliance. NBSA decided to close the matter and inform the complainant and broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 24. Channel Times Now Complainant Mr. Sharad Shah Date of Broadcast 13.4.2018 Complaint

Complaint The complaint was that the report on a charge sheet that the Delhi Police was going to file against Mr. Shashi Tharoor for abetment of suicide of his wife in the programme "Newshour" at 9 PM on 13.4.2018, was a continuation of the tirade against Mr. Tharoor by the channel, and seemed more like a plant by the Delhi Police and the reporter seemed to be acting as a conduit for Delhi Police rather than a reporter of the channel. Response from broadcaster: The broadcaster in their response denied the allegations made by the complainant and stated that there was absolutely no merit in the contention that the reporter was acting as a 'conduit' for the Delhi Police. The broadcaster also referred to an earlier order dated 9.0.7.2015 and stated that it had not been violated the said order as there was no parallel investigation or media trial, nor were any speculations/half-truths/ distorted facts were shown in the broadcast.

Decisions

30.10.2018
NBSA considered the complaint, response and also viewed the broadcast. NBSA noted that the broadcaster was merely reporting the details of the charges that the Delhi Police had indicated will be made it in the charge sheet against Mr. Shashi Tharoor. NBSA found no violation of the Regulations or Guidelines of NBSA. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform the complainant and broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 25. Channel Zee Hindustan Complainant Ms. Rajesh Kumari, Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Mr. Rampal S. Singh [3] Date of Broadcast 2.5.2018 Complaint

Complaint: The complainants allege that the programme titled “Ayassi ke Addo ke caretaker Kon? Babon ke paap lok ka reality check” aired on Zee Hindustan on 2.5.2018 at 9.30 pm reportage is not only false, defamatory, derogatory but also incendiary and telecasted with a view to incite hatred, ill-will against Sant Rampal Ji and caused public disorder; that it contains reportage in an aggressive, intimidating and browbeating style and was telecasted with commentary and taglines labeling Sant Rampal Ji as an antisocial; and that though Sant Rampalji has been acquitted in land/property fraud case on 1.5.2018 by a court of Rohtak. Response from broadcaster: The broadcaster stated that the complainant has focused on the issue that Sant Rampal has been acquitted in land grabbing case. Whereas, the telecast primarily focused on ‘Sedition’ case and ruckus created by him in 2014; that the complainant has objected to only one part of the entire telecast, but has not disputed the other content of the said telecast; and that was sufficient to show the bonafide intention of the broadcaster and veracity of the contents aired by it. The broadcaster admitted that it had received an uncertified copy of the court judgement dated 1.5.2018 acquitting Sant Rampal (in the land grabbing case) but explained that the script of special programme was prepared 2-3 days prior to date of telecast, long before the receipt of the judgement. Broadcaster stated that without prejudice to its rights, it was willing to air a news item, to this effect, in accordance with the editorial discretion if it is provided with the certified copy of the relevant order showing acquittal of Sant Rampal in the said case.

Decisions

30.10.2018
NBSA considered the complaint, response and also viewed the CD of the alleged broadcast. While going through the script of the alleged broadcast NBSA noted that the channel had broadcast “self-styled godman Rampal is a serious offender than Virender Dev Dixit. Godman Rampal who is at present lodged in jail was an engineer and is facing charges of sedition. The activities that were undergoing in Satlok Ashram has even shocked the Police. Cases of land fraud, murder, violence are registered against Rampal. In May 2013, when police reached the ashram to arrest Rampal, violent clashes broke out. The godman created an army of goons who had reached the ashram in disguise of followers. At present, Rampal is jailed in Tihar and is counting days for his trial. On the other hand, his ashram is sealed.” NBSA noted from the script received from the broadcaster had reported that even though he has not been convicted in any of the several cases pending against him, Godman Rampal “is a serious offender”. NBSA further noted that this manner of reporting, that is described persons accused of crime as ‘offenders’ thereby imputing guilt even before any court holds them guilty is a common practice among channels. NBSA decided to remind members that while referring to persons who were under trial (and who have not been convicted), or while reporting about matters which are sub judice, they should use prefixes like “alleged”, “accused”. For example, channels should use the description ‘alleged serious offenders’ (instead of ‘serious offenders’). Similarly, while referring to a person accused of murder or rape, care should be taken to avoid describing them as ‘murderer’ or ‘rapist’ and use the words “…accused of murder’ or alleged rapist’. NBSA also noted that any reporting describing a person accused of a crime as perpetrator of the crime, is in violation of Guideline No 3 of the “Specific Guidelines for Reporting Court Proceedings”, dated 15.9.2010 which states that “conjectures and speculation shall be avoided in news reports relating to proceedings pending in a court, tribunal or other judicial forum”.

S.NO 26. Channel INDIA TV Complainant Mr. Sanjay Anand [MoI&B] Date of Broadcast 7.5.2018 Complaint

The complainant alleged that in the programme “Aaj ki baat Rajat Sharma ke sath” telecast on 7.5.2018, Mr. Rajat Sharma said that “jo kaam BJP ken neta nahi kar sakte voh kaam BJP key neta Mani Shankar Aiyer Pakistan me kar rahe hai”. According to the complainant, India TV is misguiding the public by stating that Mr. Mani Shankar is a neta/member of BJP, as he is not a member of BJP. Broadcaster’s response dated 28.5.2018: Broadcaster stated that the complainant has misunderstood the statement made by Mr. Rajat Sharma; and that what was stated was “Waise jo kaam BJP ke neta nahin kar sakte, wo kaam BJP ke liye Mani Shankar Iyer kar rahe hain”. Broadcaster also stated that what was referred was a live broadcast, it is possible that the complainant might have incorrectly heard and misinterpreted what was stated by Mr. Rajat Sharma. It was pointed out that Mr. Mani Shankar Aiyer’s association with the Congress party is a well-known fact and hence no question of misguiding the public can arise.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the complaint, response and also viewed the CD. NBSA found that there was no violation of the Regulations or Guidelines of NBA or NBSA. NBSA therefore decided to close the complaint and inform MoI&B and broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 27. Channel CNN News18, Republic TV, Zee News, ABP News Complainant MoI&B [4] Date of Broadcast 10.4.2018 & 13.4.2018 Complaint

MoI&B, vide letter dated 15.5.2018 informed NBA that it came to the notice of the Ministry that while reporting about the Unnao incident that the above channels disclosed the identify of victims’ family. The Ministry pointed out that while reporting on rape victims, the channel will have to comply with the order of the Delhi Court in A.K Asthana Vs. UOI & Anr (Civil WP.787/2012), Guidelines on Media Reporting on Children, Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 228A of the IPC, as also provisions prescribed under Programme/Advertising Codes. Response dated 12.6.2018 from CNN News18: CNN News18 vide letter dated 12.6.2018 stated that (i) The news report did not disclose the identity of the rape victim. It only shows bytes of her father and one of her uncles, without disclosing the victim’s name or identity. (ii) The footage of the victim’s father was shown without blurring the face since it was a long shot and his face was in a shadow and was not visible or recognizable in any manner. Further, the footage was used since it showed the victim’s father being beaten up without showing or making his face visible. The said footage does not disclose the face of the victim’s father or any other information which may be treated as disclosing the victim’s identity. (iii) The byte of the victim’s uncle cannot be termed as revealing the identity of the victim as the name of the victim was never revealed and, in the absence of the same, it was too farfetched to link that person to the victim. (iv) There was no intention on their part to reveal the identity or violate the privacy or dignity of the victim. The footage was shown with the sole intention to facilitate the cause of bringing the guilty to the book under the bonafide belief that this would lead to justice to the victim and her family and, consequently, be in their interest. The footage was telecast under the bonafide impression that there was nothing wrong in telecasting it. (v) As soon as they realized that their bonafide act (which was- intended to be in the interest of the child victim and her family) may be viewed by the authorities as a violation of some guidelines / statutes, they made necessary amends by immediately dropping the footage on the same day. They have since not telecast the same again and do not intend to do so. Response dated 2.7.2018 from Republic TV: Republic TV vide letter dated 2.7.2018 stated that while the victim’s images were blurred in all their telecasts, the uncle’s image was shown with a black band over the eyes in its initial broadcast at around 4:58 pm on 10.4.2018; that thereafter, the uncle began to appear voluntarily in front of television camera along with the victim to express his/their anguish and travails; that in such appearances, the victim was appearing having with her face covered and masked, but her uncle never tried to hide identity; and that these voluntary appearances were telecast without any masking or blurring of the uncle’s images, as was captured on camera. It was submitted that television being a visual medium, relies on images and visuals; and that as the victim’s uncle was not hesitating to take up the cause in public, it did not blur the image inadvertently in the rush of the moment. The channel stated that they would exercise more stringent care in future as a responsible national broadcast media. Response dated 14.6.2018 from Zee News: Zee News vide letter dated 14.6.2018 stated that in most of the telecasts on the Unnao incident, face of the victim and her family members was blurred; that they never put such content on air without proper filtration and treatment, as is required; and that however in one news report, face of one elderly lady could not be blurred due to a technical snag/glitch and not on account of malafide intention to disclose the identity of the victim. They stated that they will take additional precautions while telecasting such sensitive stories. Response dated 6.6.2018 from ABP News: ABP News vide letter dated 6.6.2018 stated that the said program was telecast on 10.4.2018 at 9:30 pm for 10 minutes and was not repeated thereafter. They stated that the footage was blurred at appropriate places, including but not limited to, blurring the face of father of Unnao rape victim. They submitted that there was no violation of either the program code or any applicable laws.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the letter of MoI&B, replies of the broadcasters and also viewed the CDs. After deliberations NBSA decided that a warning be issued to the broadcasters and that they should be more careful in airing such sensitive matters and that any future violations would be viewed seriously and action would be taken against the broadcasters. NBSA decided to inform the broadcaster and MoI&B accordingly and close the matter.

S.NO 28. Channel Aaj Tak Complainant Mr. Prateek Dhawan [MoI&B] Date of Broadcast 13.4.2018 Complaint

Complaint: The complainant alleged that on 13.4.2018 (in the afternoon headlines between 2 pm-2:30 pm), the channel had falsely stated that the Jammu Bar Association President made a deplorable comment regarding youths taking up AK47 against the arrest of convicts in Kathua case. It was alleged that what was shown was a short portion of the clip and if the entire clip had been shown, it would have that the Bar Association President’s remarks were in regard to deporting of Rohingya Muslims and it was not connected to Kathua case. Response from the broadcaster: Broadcaster submitted that Mr. B.S Slathia, the President of Jammu Bar Association, had supported the Jammu Bandh (with all the other opposition parties, who were demanding CBI enquiry in the Rasana Rape case) and started giving hate speech during the bandh and provoked the youth of Jammu with the following statement: "Today we are with national flag but a day will come, when we will pick up AK- 47 and Bombs''. The broadcaster alleged that the DGP, Dr. S.P. Vaid, had also condemned the statements made by Mr. Slathia in view of Jammu Bandh. The Broadcaster stated that the telecast of the speech of Mr. Slathia during the Jammu Bandh was made in an unbiased, objective and impartial manner.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the complaint, response and also viewed the CD and found that there was no violation of the Regulations or Guidelines of NBA or NBSA. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform MoI&B and broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 29. Channel Tez, News X, Total TV Complainant MoI&B [3] Date of Broadcast 25.4.2018 Complaint

MoI&B, vide letter dated 3.5.2018 informed NBA that it came to the notice of the Ministry that the above TV channels had disclosed on 25.4.2018, the identity of rape victim's father, in the case of Asaram Bapu case. It was alleged that while carrying the said news report, the channels had carried the bytes of the victim's father talking to the media, without blurring his face. It was observed that by revealing the identity of the victim's father, the channels exposed the victim to the risk of being identified and subjected to social stigma. It also stated that in regard to reportage on rape victims, TV channels were required to ensure compliance with the Order of the Delhi High Court, in A.K. Asthana Vs. UOI & Anr (Civil WP.787/2012), the Guidelines on Media Reporting on Children, Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 228A of the IPC, as also provisions prescribed under Programme/ Advertising Codes. Response dated 31.5.2018 from the Tez: Broadcaster submitted that the victim's father was interviewed live as soon as the decision came out in the Asaram rape case; that the victim’s father came with a towel covering his face to mask his identity; that during the live broadcast, the towel unraveled partially; and that the video revealed that the victim's father was repeatedly advised to cover his face when the towel slipped. It was submitted that being a live interview, it was not possible for the channel to monitor or control the broadcast and it was not the intention of the channel to show the face of victims' father. In so far as Aaj Tak was concerned, the broadcaster stated that the channel did not carry the news complained of. Therefore, MoI&B was requested to provide the CD of the alleged broadcast by Aaj Tak. EMMC, by letter dated 25.6.2018, confirmed that Aaj Tak did not disclose the identity of rape victim’s father who spoke to the media after Asaram Bapu verdict. Response dated 25.6.2018 from News X: Broadcaster submitted that they received a feed from ANI covering the post judgement comments/statements, which included a video containing a clip of the victim’s father; that when the said feed received from ANI was played, just for a fraction, the face of victim’s father was telecast inadvertently; and that when that was noticed, their team took remedial steps immediately and blurred the face as required under the MIB Guidelines. It was submitted that there was no disclosure of identification of any member of the family of the victim or the victim herself during that telecast; and that in all the subsequent telecasts, the face of the victim’s father was blurred. Response dated 22.5.2018 from Total TV: Broadcaster submitted that in the telecast on 25.4.2018 (at 2:54 to 2:56 PM) the byte of a person whose face was half covered with a scarf was shown for 1 minute 16 seconds. Broadcaster further submitted that ANI and other agencies also aired the story; that it was not mentioned that the byte shown was that of victim’s father; that as the anchor and the reporter were not aware of the identity of the person, they did not reveal his identity; and that as soon as it became known that the byte was that of victim’s father, prompt remedial action was taken and within 12 minutes, the story was aired with his face blurred. It was submitted that the earlier telecast was accidental without any intention to show the father of the victim.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the letter of MoI&B, responses of the broadcasters and also viewed the CDs. NBSA was of the view that the broadcasters should have taken sufficient care in broadcasting such sensitive news. NBSA therefore decided to warn the broadcasters to be more careful in future while airing such sensitive matters and that any future violations would be viewed seriously and action would be taken against the broadcaster. NBSA decided to close the matter and inform the broadcaster and MoI&B accordingly.

S.NO 30. Channel ETV Urdu [Now News18 Urdu] Complainant Mr. Fayaz Ahmad Sodagar, Advocate [on behalf of Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah] [MoI&B] Date of Broadcast 3.1.2018 Complaint

Complaint: The complaint is that ETV Urdu on 3.1.2018 at 7 PM, carried a false and frivolous report (when news was being telecast in Kashmir) that Rs 62.00 lakh was recovered from Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah by Enforcement Directorate; it was stated that even the charge sheet filed by E.D New Delhi against Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah does not reveal anywhere that rupees Sixty lac has been recovered or seized from him, no attempt was made by the channel to verify the correctness or authenticity of the allegations that money was recovered from Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah. Response from Broadcaster: Broadcaster in their response dated 14.3.2018 stated that the news flash was telecast in the form of a ticker “ hearing on Shabbir Shah's money laundering case from 15th January in Patiala House Court. ED attaches Rs.62 lacs”, based on a press release issued by the Enforcement Directorate. Broadcaster stated that there was no intention on its part to damage the reputation of Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah; that its object was to inform the public about the incident; and that the channel had taken adequate precautions while reporting the news and conduct several levels of verification before actually airing a news story.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 24.5.2018 considered the complaint, response and the ticker text aired on the channel. NBSA was of the view that if the ticker was based on any Enforcement Directorate Press Release, there was nothing objectionable in the news ticker; NBSA decided to call upon the channel to make available a copy of the press release said to have been issued by the Enforcement Directorate and consider the matter at its next meeting. NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the same and noted that the objected contents were based on the press release which was said to have been issued by the Enforcement Directorate. Since the broadcaster was merely reporting what was stated in the said press release, NBSA found no violation of the Regulations or Guidelines of NBA or NBSA. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform MoI&B and broadcaster accordingly.