Two days after restraining a TV channel from running a programme on alleged infiltration by Muslims into UPSC, the Supreme Court on Friday softened its stand, saying that a pre-publication ban order is "extreme recourse" and is like a "nuclear weapon" and can "take it down to slippery slope".
It, however, asked the Sudarshan News TV to voluntarily assuage its apprehension on use of "stereotypes", "rants", "rhetorics" and "hurtful" denigration of an entire community. The court said it knew what happened during Emergency so it would ensure free speech and ideas.
It also sought to know the Union government's stand on strengthening self-regulation mechanism for the broadcasters.
"We espouse free speech. We are conscious of the grave dangers that injunction at a pre-broadcast stage has. We don't want this (its injunction order) to become the law of the land," a three-judge bench presided over by Justice D Y Chandrachud said.
Senior advocate Shyam Divan took the court through a lengthy affidavit by his client Suresh Chavhanke, editor-in-chief of Sudarshan TV, to assert that he had exercised his journalist freedom and prepared investigative series.
The court had on September 15 restrained the channel from running remaining episodes of programme 'UPSC Jihad' shown in the editor's 8 pm show of 'Bindas Bol'.
Agreeing to Divan's contention, the bench said, "While we respect freedom of media, let this message to go to the media as well that any particular community shouldn't become a target. Ultimately we all exist as a nation, which has to be cohesive and not against any community."
Divan, for his part, asserted the channel used records showing the Zakat Foundation, which supported Muslim candidates to clear UPSC, had received funds from terror-linked organisations across the world.
"We don't want to do censorship. We are not the censor board. We want your client to come to us and tell us how he wants to assuage our apprehensions," the bench, also comprising Justices Indu Malhotra and K M Joseph said.
"We don't issue such injunctions readily. We know it can take us down a slippery slope," the bench said.
The bench said it has got no problem if the report was about the NGO and its funds but the difficulty arose when an entire community was implicated to allege infiltration into the bureaucracy and certain stereotypes were used in the show.
"Whenever you refer to the Civil Services, you refer to the ISI and that is a serious concern as you show it as a conspiracy by Muslims," the court said.
"The programme shows grave disrespect to this community. Everyone wants to be at the power centre. What you are doing is that you are marginalising those who should be brought to the mainstream. By doing this, you will be driving them in the wrong hands. Where are we headed," Justice Joseph said.
The court gave time to the channel to file a fresh affidavit as it posted a writ petition by advocate Firoz Iqbal Khan against the programme, for consideration on September 21.
During the hearing, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said he would file an affidavit on the role of National Broadcasters Association, regulatory mechanism and judgements.