"No Coercive Action To Be Taken Till The Next Date " Ekta Kapoor Gets Relief From MP HC Over Objectionable Content In Her Web-Show 'XXX Season 2'

The bench of Justice Shailendra Shukla has granted two days to the counsel for the respondents to produce the C. D. (Compact Disk) containing alleged objectionable material.

It may be noted that on 05^th June 2020, an FIR was registered against television producer Ekta Kapoor and two others in Madhya Pradesh on charges of spreading obscenity, hurting religious feelings, and improper use of national emblems in her web show XXX season 2.

The complainant, Valmik Sakaragaye, a resident of Indore, had alleged that the web show XXX season 2, aired on Kapoor's subscription-based video platform - 'ALT Balaji', spreads obscenity and hurts religious feelings. The FIR also mentions a particular scene which allegedly portrays the Indian Army's uniform in a highly objectionable way.

The FIR, bearing Crime No.214/2020 was registered against Ekta Kapoor under sections 294 (obscene acts and songs) and 298 (Uttering, words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person) & 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 67 (Punishment for publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form) and 67-A (Punishment for publishing or transmitting of material containing sexually explicit act, etc. in electronic form) of the Information Technology (IT) Act, and Section 3 ( Prohibition of improper use of emblem) of the State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005.

The counsel for the applicant prayed before the court that an order as to "no coercive action" be passed against the applicant till the next date of hearing.

Notably, in the petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the counsel for the applicant submitted that there is no obscenity as depicted in the FIR and he sought the quashing of FIR.

However, learned counsel for the complainant submitted before the court that the applicant is a producer of the Web Series in which there are contents and elements of obscenity and also the dishonor of National Emblem.

The observation of the court

The court observed that the aforesaid material, based on which the FIR has been lodged, needs to be perused and the respondents must produce such C.D. for perusal.

However, no such material/ Compact Disk was available on record and as the court noted, the same was required to be filed.

The counsel for respondents was directed by the court to produce the questioned material for perusal in two copies, one for the applicant and another for the court.

Further, the court ordered that "there shall be no coercive action against the applicant till the next date of hearing."

The matter has been listed for next hearing on 26.08.2020.

It may be noted that in the month of June, a PIL was filed before the Allahabad High Court seeking a blanket ban on streaming of web series "XXX - Season 2", allegedly for disrespecting the Indian Army and their uniforms.

The petition was filed by one Anniruddha Singh, brother-in-law of an Indian soldier, seeking a ban on the show produced by Ekta Kapoor, which is allegedly tarnishing and maligning the social reputation of wives of army officers.

Notably, the Ministry of Defence had requested the Central Board of Film Certification to advise all production houses to obtain a "No Objection Certificate" from the Ministry, before telecasting any movie/ web series based on Army theme. 

A letter in this regard was sent by the Ministry to the CBFC to prevent the production houses from "distorting the image of the Army". The Ministry had urged that the persons concerned may be advised to prevent "any incident which distorts the image of Defence Forces or hurts their sentiment."

It may be noted that soon after the controversy erupted, Kapoor had reportedly issued a statement informing that the controversial scene has been deleted. 

She said,

"As an individual and as an organization, we are deeply respectful towards the Indian Army. Their contribution to our well-being and security is immense. We have already deleted the scene that is being spoken about, so the action has been taken from our side. We fully apologize for any sentiment that is hurt unintentionally." (emphasis supplied)

Case Details:

Case Title: Ekta Kapoor vs. State of M.P. & Anr.

Case No.: MCRC No. 28386/2020

Quorum: Justice Shailendra Shukla

Appearance: Advocate Vinay Saraf, Advocate Anand Soni and Advocate Nitesh Jain Rajnish Sharma (for the Applicant); Advocate Nisha Tanwar (for the respondent-State); Advocate Bhuwan Gautam (for the respondent no.2)

Click Here To Download Order

[Read Order]