Aastha Thakur
Published on: 15 October 2022 at 22:45 IST
Ekta Kapoor’s attempt to enlist the aid of the legal system failed when the Supreme Court harshly criticised the director for “polluting” the brains of the younger generation. The apex court also issued a warning to the filmmaker not to submit any more pleas and mandated that if she does, a fee will be assessed.
The Supreme Court was considering Ekta’s appeal of the arrest warrants that had been issued against her for allegedly disrespecting army and offending their families through the “objectionable material” of the online series XXX, which was broadcast on her OTT platform ALTBalaji.
The warrant was issued by a trial court in Begusarai, Bihar, in response to a complaint made by an ex-serviceman named Shambhu Kumar who claimed that the second season of the show had multiple unpleasant scenes involving a soldier’s wife.
The Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi represented Ekta and seek the police protection from the court, mentioning it has been granted in past as well. The counsel further argued that the Ekta has her freedom of choice and the questionable content here is subscription based.
The bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar chided Ekta after counsel submits that plea is filed in Patna High Court, but there is no chance it would will be listed for hearing.
The bench of Supreme Court also added that, “Something has to be done. You are polluting the minds of the young generation of this country. It is available to all. OTT (Over The Top) content is available to all. What kind of choice are you providing to the people?….on the contrary you are polluting the minds of youngsters.”
The court stopped short of imposing costs but warned Ekta, “Every time you travel to this court….we don’t appreciate this. We will put a cost on you for filing such a petition. Mr Rohatgi please convey this to your client. Just because you can afford and hire the services of good lawyers….”
“This court is not for those who have voices. This court works for those who don’t have voices…if these people who have all kinds of facilities, if they cannot get justice then think of the situation of this common man. We have seen the order and we have our reservations.”
The Supreme Court rejected the request and advised assigning a local lawyer to monitor the progress of the Patna High Court case’s hearing.