[Media Trial In Sushant Singh Rajput Case] Live-Updates Of Hearing From Bombay High Court

Union of India derives power to regulate broadcasting from Entry 31 of list 1.

Section 4 of Telegraph Act issues licence to broadcasters which provides powers to the Central Government of granting licences basis conditions, says Kamat.

Media trial affront to two basic principles -> Rule of Law & it interferes in the administration of Justice, Kamat says.

Whether a media trial offends the interest of other stakeholders. 19(1)(a) wide but when it starts interfering in rights of others then your lordships will open the discussion as to where Lakshman Rekha starts, says Kamat.

Kamat's internet connection is sporadic. He apologies to the Court, says he is not in Delhi.

Court says they figured that and they understand. "The place you're arguing from today looks different!"

Contention is Uplinking downlinking guidelines binding upon the parties? The first part of your question 2 in the submissions in not accurate, Bombay HC asks Kamat

Pursuant to the guidelines issued by the Government, there is a contract between Union & Broadcaster, Kamat says

Kamat elaborates on his skeletal rejoinder arguments:

1) Whether a media trial of the kind unleashed by Respondent news broadcasters permissible under Article 19(1)(a)

2) Whether contract for uplinking and downlinking binding on parties.

3) Whether the erring by authorities in taking action.

Court asks if other petitioners seeks to rejoin today.

Senior Advocate Devdutt Kamat for petitioner says that he wishes to make submission but he is facing network issues. He will disconnect and join the hearing again.

Advocate Punamiya cites some judgments.

You should have made time, this matter was listed today. We don't have further time to spare and we will hear it today, Bombay HC tells Petitioner.

Advocate Rahul Sarda for petitioner seeks to rejoin to arguments on Monday or any time in the next week.