MEDIA WATCH GROUP Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) One Kartari was allegedly raped by a Doctor. She and her husband (Dharam-vir) were interviewed by respondent No. 4 on behalf of Doordarshan through a women organisation-"Mahila Dakshita Samiti" which was telecast on Doordarshan's National Network on 18.3.1995. It appears that faces of both Kartari and Dharamvir were somewhat identifiable on the screen ffurnishing basis for this petition. The issue was first taken up by Mahila Samiti with Doordarshan but later petitioner filed this writ petition for directing respondent No. 1 to frame Rules/Regulations or to issue and prescribe guide-lines for telecast of programmes featuring rape and violence victim and to restrain respondents 1 and 2 from telecasting any such programme without concealing the identity or otherwise maintaining the anonymity of such women unless a written consent was obtained by them. It was also prayed that they be directed to take action against the errant officers responsible for the telecast of controversial programme and pay compensation of Rs.1 lac to Kartari and her family jointly or severally.

(2.) Petitioner claims to be a media watch dog and its grievance is that R 1 to 4 had violated the right of privacy of rape victim Kartari infringing her fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, by bringing her shame and humiliation and resulting in irreparable damage to her husband who had disowned her.

(3.) Respondents 1 and 2 have opposed this petiti on the plea that impugned programme-"Lens Eye" was telecast under "current affairs" category and therefore the guide-lines related to news policy were applicable to it. It is explained by them that this programme was previewed by Preview Committee of Doordarshan and was cleared by it after the producer of the programme had assured that Kartari had accorded her consent for revealing her identity.