Today, On 3rd July, The Karnataka High Court directed the Centre to determine if Power TV can resume broadcasting. On June 25, a single judge issued an interim order halting Power TV’s broadcasts due to an expired broadcasting licence. The court found that the channel’s operator not yet renewed the necessary licence.
Bengaluru: A Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court on Wednesday choose not to intervene with a single judge’s interim order to stop the broadcast of Kannada news channel, Power TV.
The Bench, consisting of Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice KV Aravind, instructed the Central government to quickly decide whether the channel can resume its broadcasts.
The court set a six-week deadline for the decision on the show cause notice issued by the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting on February 9, alleging violations of the Cable TV Networks Act and related rules. This period also includes time for considering an application for the renewal of Power TV’s license, which filed in 2022.
The High Court mandated that the Union government must provide Power TV an opportunity to present its case before making a final decision. Additionally, the Bench allowed Power TV’s owner and operator, Power Smart Media Private Limited and Mitcoin Infraprojects, to submit their response to the Union government within one week, should they choose to do so.
The order passed while disposing of two writ appeals against a common interim order issued by Justice SR Krishna Kumar on June 25. In this order, Justice Kumar found prima facie that the license to broadcast content on Power TV had not been renewed. Therefore, he restrained the channel from broadcasting any content.
The interim order passed on two writ petitions one filed by an IPS officer, Dr. BR Ravikanthe Gowda, and the other filed by a former Member of the Karnataka Legislative Council, HM Ramesh Gowda, and his wife Dr. A Ramya Ramesh. The petitioners claimed they had been the victims of derogatory broadcasts by Power TV and that the channel did not have a valid license to operate.
The interim order challenged by Power Smart Media and Mitcoin before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench opined that it is not inclined to lift the stay imposed by the single judge until the controversy is finally decided and the allegations raised in the February 9 show cause notice are addressed.
The Division Bench clarified that the temporary prohibition on broadcasts cannot be equated with a prohibition against the fundamental rights to free speech and expression, and that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the allegations made by the rival sides since the matter is yet to be decided by the competent authorities.