New Delhi: Swayamsevaks Complaints to NBSA Against TV Channels for Distorting Bhagwat’s Speech
January 18th, 2013.
New Delhi Jan 18, 2013: Few RSS representatives of New Delhi lodged a complaint to NBA/NBSA against broadcasters/channels for deliberately distorting speech of sarsanghchalak of RSS Mohan Bhagwat. In the complaint, RSS prachar pramukh of delhi Rajiv Tuli, Media in-charge Vagish Issar, and supreme court advocates Vikas Mahajan, Arun Bhardwaj and Barun Kumar Sinha have sought unconditional apology from the channels.
The complainants alleged that ethics and broadcasting standards have been violated by the channels and the reporting has been done unfairly to tarnish the image of the swayamsewaks and RSS.
“Several distorted judgmental comments were made by the Anchors. RSS respects every woman and have great respect in marriage system. The broadcaster mischievously twisted the facts and the news reports are not only distorted but are highly defamatory.” they wrote in their complaint..
Here is the full text of the complaint:
Application/complaint for taking suomoto action againt broadcasters/channels for deliberately distorting speech of sarsanghchalak of RSS
Name of Broadcaster— NDTV, CNN-IBN,Times Now, Headlines Today, AAj Tak,Zee News, IBN7,ABP News,News24, IndiaTV
Programme Title / Broadcast Item: RSS Sarsanghchalak’s Speech at Indore,
Programme date: dd/mm/yr 06 jan 2013
Time of Broadcast : details as per copy attached
Complainant(s) Please complete these details in full.
Surname Mahajan
First Name Vikas
Mr. / Mrs. / Ms. Mr
Address B 41, Jangpura Extn New Delhi
Daytime Phone No.: 9810196050
Mobile No.: 9810196050
Email (if applicable) vmlawyers@gmail.com
Fax Number (if applicable)
All complaints decided by the Authority may be made publicly available by the Authority, including the name of the complainant. However, in the event a complainant has valid concerns relating to privacy issues in making a complaint, the Authority may in its absolute discretion consider requests from the complainant for anonymity / confidentiality.
Has a complaiomplaint been made to the BroadcasterHas a nt already been made to the Has a complaint already been made to the Broadcaster ?Broadcaster ? Yes No
Has a complaint already been made to the broadcaster—No —as the request is to take action suo moto as it has hurt crores of swayamsewaks across the Country and abroad.
Here state the substance of the complaint, with all relevant and material facts : For taking suo moto action, this complaint is being made direct to the NBA as the matter has extensively caused irreparable hurt to the swayamsevaks in RSS across the country and abroad.
Complaint for violation of “Guidelines dt 13 dec 2012 on broadcast of Potentially Defamatory content” and code of ethics and broadcasting standards:
1. Applicant /complainant is a member of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (popularly known as RSS) and believes in its ideology. He has abiding faith in the tenets of the organisation and has deep respect for the head of the RSS Param Pujaniya Shri Mohanrao Bhagwat, the present Sar Sangh Chalak.
2. The Complainant is a person aggrieved and hence making a complaint in regard to a programme broadcast by NDTV, CNN-IBN, Times Now, Headlines Today, AAj Tak, Zee News, IBN7,ABP News,News24, IndiaTV, a Member / Associate Member of the NBA.
3. The Date, Time and Channel of Broadcast is 6th Jan 2013 by NDTV, CNN-IBN,Times Now, Headlines Today, AAj Tak,Zee News, IBN7,ABP News,News24, IndiaTV channel, several times during the day.
4. I am a citizen of Bharat residing at address given below. I am a follower of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (popularly known as RSS) and believe in its Hindu Patriotic ideology. I have faith in the tenets of the RSS and have deep respect for the Sarsanghchalak of the RSS Param Pujaniya Shri Mohanrao Bhagwat.
5. Then on 5th January 2013, at Indore, in a Programme at Paramaanand Ashram, Param Pujaniya Shri Mohanrao Bhagwat, the present SarSanghChalak had addressed a gathering of followers of the Ashram and others and Dr Mohanji Bhagwat, clearly pointed out that marriage in Bharat is sacrosanct and not a contract which can be revoked or severed at any time, according to the choice of husband or wife as the case may be.
That w.r.t. the above, the Broadcaster Channel namely NDTV, CNN-IBN,Times Now, Headlines Today, AAj Tak,Zee News, IBN7,ABP News,News24, IndiaTV had broadcast a programme on 6th Jan 2013 on its channel, which is available even now at the following link www.ndtv.com/article/india/women-meant-to-do-household-chores-another-shocker-from-rss-chief-313779 - 97k
Zee News
zeenews.india.com/news/madhya-pradesh/indore-rss-office-attack-seven-nsui-workers-held_821805.html - 69k
Business Standard
Link www.business-standard.com/generalnews/news/seven-nsui-workers-held-after-attackrss-office-in-indore/106946/ - 155k –
YoutubeLink
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ocvG7sGWfTQ - 214k –
India Today.in
toi link
TezNews
6 Short summary of what the complainant is aggrieved of:
Your channel was conscious of the power and impact of the audio-visual medium and the phenomenal reach of their news channels, and to cause incalculable harm NDTV, CNN-IBN, Times Now, Headlines Today, AAj Tak, Zee News, IBN7, ABP News,News24, IndiaTV has reported as if the Sangh pramukh has described “pati patni ka rishta-ek sauda”, for Bhartiya marriage , which he never said as is evident from full speech delivered on 6th Jan 2013 at Indore. Several other distorted judgmental comments were made by the Anchor. RSS respects every woman as equal to mother and marriage as a sacrament. The broadcaster mischievously twisted the facts and the news reports are not only distorted but are highly defamatory. This is a deliberate attempt to lower the image of the Swayamsewaks in public. By virtue of this Broadcast, the broadcaster/channel has not ensured impartiality and objectivity in reporting or neutrality. It has occurred to arouse passions to endanger the national security and tranquillity. The ethics and broadcasting standards have been violated by the broadcaster/channel and the reporting has been done unfairly to tarnish the image of the swayamsewaks and RSS.
7 The broadcaster/channel converted the matter into a very sensitive matter without strictly vetted and edited broadcast it mischievously. The channel should have refrained themselves from such false, erroneous and malicious reporting which was certainly an illegal act to cause undue harm to theRashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh as well as to hurt the feelings of the crores of swayamsevaks in Bharat, apart from the members of majority community of Hindus in Bharat.
8 When you comment on a person’s views you ought to project it in the totality of the entire gamut of ideas presented by the speaker. On the contrarythe broadcaster/channel’s conduct has been one of gross irresponsibility and misuse of the freedom of the press and you have let loose an attack on Mohanji Bhagwat who is held in high esteem by crores of Bhartiyas. The broadcaster/channel did it with the ulterior motive to tarnish the image of the RSS and crores of swayamsevaks in and out of Bharat. The conduct of broadcaster/channel is intentional, motivated, and with a view to scandalise and malign the person and the organisation. The broadcaster/channel mischievously and maliciously, broadcast a false, distorted version of the speech and rushed to insensible conclusions and let loose through your channel reaching the general populace of the country and the world at large.
10 The Channel, in a deliberate attempt maliciously, misquoted him and broadcast the programme with an entirely opposite view and certainly with a bad taste.
11 The anchor/presenter has deliberately made serious derogatory, derisive and wrong judgemental statements as part of reporting/ commentating.
12 Before reporting the accusation, intentionally the version of the RSS chief was not obtained and hence not aired simultaneously with the accusation and hence a true complete picture was not given to the viewer.
13 Before broadcasting any such news/ programmes, the channel did not take necessary steps to ascertain its veracity and credibility and allowed its programme to become a platform for spreading acrimony.
14 Thus “Guidelines dt 13 dec 2012 on broadcast of Potentially Defamatory content” have been deliberately violated by you. A copy of such guidelines is annexed as Ann C-1 with this complaint.
14 Applicant as a Swayamsevak was deeply hurt by aforesaid false propaganda in which false allegations were made against the RSS and its Sar Sangh Chalak, in order to bring them down in public esteem and to harm their reputation. The Broadcaster knew that such publication would certainly harm their reputation and they had reason to believe that such publication would harm their reputation.
15 The channels/broadcasters have falsely, wrongly quoted Parampoojneeya Mohanji as having said ‘Woman is bound by social contract to look after her husband’ or ‘women meant to do household chores’ or ‘wife bound to look after home’ or ” women should limit themselves to household chores” or ‘woman bound to look after husband’. This was not a part of his speech which has been recorded, the true transcript of which is annexed.
16 But the broadcasters as above, in a deliberate attempt, maliciously misquoted him and published the news with an entirely opposite view and certainly with a bad taste.17 The channels have done such false, erroneous and malicious reporting which was certainly an illegal act to cause undue harm to the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh as well as to hurt the feelings of the crores of swayamsevaks in Bharat, apart from the members of majority community of Hindus in Bharat.17A That the above cited news has created a distorted impression about the RSS and also of Poojaneeya Mohan Bhagwat & applicant like any other swayamsevak, has been immensely hurt .This news is in clear violation of law. These broadcasters are primary source of this programme and intentionally did this to malign the image of Dr Mohan Bhagwat and RSS and the crores of swayamsewaks.It is learnt that many media houses including Times have withdrawn from their earlier stand proving the fact that the speech of Poojaneeya Sarsanghachalak Dr Mohan Bhagwat ji was maliciously published, and falsely reported by your newspaper.That there is clear distortion in the quotes hence an offence under section 499 of IPC has also been committed.
17B. When a an Anchor comments on a person’s views you ought to project it in the totality of the entire gamut of ideas presented by the speaker. On the contrary your conduct has been one of gross irresponsibility and under cover of the freedom of the press you have let loose an attack on Dr. Mohanji Bhagwat who is held in high esteem by crores of Bhartiyas. You did it with the ulterior motive to tarnish the image of the RSS and crores of swayamsevaks in and out of Bharat. Your conduct is intentional, motivated, and with a view to scandalise and malign the person and the organisation. You mischievously and maliciously, reported a false, distorted version of the speech and rushed to insensible conclusions and let loose through media reaching the general populace of the country and the world at large.
18.The Channels/Broadcasters have not acted with due care and attention and hence your action is not in “good faith’ as defined in sec 52 IPC.
19 As a responsible Channel/Broadcaster, your liability extends to every portion of the broadcast.
20 You are fully aware that the members of the RSS are spread all over the country. As a consequence of the scandalous remarks the image of millions of swayamsevaks has been lowered in the estimate of relations, friends and acquaintances as well as in the eyes of the public.
21 You are fully aware that law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court is binding under Article 141 of the constitution. In the case of S. Khushboo vs kanniammal reported in AIR 2010 SC 3196 the Hon’ble Supreme Court reflected as under…
”it is therefore not only desirable but imperative that electronic and news media should also play a positive role in presenting to general public as to what actually transpires during the course of hearing and it should not be published in such a manner so as to get unnecessary publicity of its own paper or news channel. Such a tendency should be stopped as without knowing the reference in context of which questions were put forth by the Court, the same were misquoted which raised unnecessary hue and cry.” By your deliberate conduct in imparting wholly baseless dissemination of news as regards the speech, you have engaged in outrageous disregard and violation of the aforesaid mandate of the Hon’ble Supreme court.
22 The malafide action of Broadcaster, without due care and attention has resulted in suffering of grave injury to the reputation of my client as also the reputation of all other swayamsewaks, spread all over the country and abroad.
23 As a matter of fact, every Indian subscribing to the spirit of Nationalism has been deeply hurt by this slanderous dissemination. Your deliberate misquoting of the speech of ParamPoojya Mohanji Bhagwat has led to widespread misgiving in the people within the country and outside as regards the status and position of women in Hindu Society.
24 The Broadcasters have been deliberately mischievous with intent to damage the image of swayamsevaks, RSS and Poojaneeya Sarsanghchalak Mohanji Bhagwat. You owe to crores of swayamsewaks of RSS and the citizenry and are obligated to undo the wrong and repair the consequential damage.
a. The broadcasters should immediately tender an unconditional apology for carrying out such a defamatory, false, malicious news item, and your unconditional apology be repeated prominently in these channels which carried such false malicious programmes
Any correspondence and reply relating to this complaint should be attached to this form.
Is the matter complained of the subject of any proceedings in a court of law or other Tribunal or Statutory Authority ? No
Declaration to be given as per Regulation 8.4
The facts stated in the complaint are true and correct to the best of my/our knowledge and belief.
I/we have placed all relevant facts before the Authority and have not concealed any material facts ;
I/we confirm that no proceedings are pending in any Court of law or other Tribunal or Statutory
Authority in respect of the subject matter complained of before the Authority ;
I /we shall inform the Authority forthwith if during the pendency of the inquiry before the Authority the matter alleged in the complaint becomes the subject-matter of any proceedings in a Court of law or other Tribunal or Statutory Authority.
0 Comments