Hyderabad: Justice E.V. Venugopal of the Telangana High Court directed YouTube and Google to forthwith remove videos allegedly containing derogatory and inflammatory remarks against Sri Ganapathi Sachchidananda Swamiji, including allegations of religious conversions and abusive expressions directed at the spiritual leader. The judge was dealing with a writ petition instituted by Sri Ganapathi Sachchidananda Avadhootha Datta Peetha Trust, Hyderabad, seeking directions to the police and social media intermediaries to remove allegedly defamatory content disseminated through the Siddhaguru YouTube Channel and associated platforms. The petitioner also sought expeditious investigation into criminal complaints registered by the cybercrime police.
According to the petitioner, Sri Ganapathi Sachchidananda Swamiji heads a globally renowned spiritual and charitable organisation engaged in religious, educational and humanitarian activities across India and abroad. The trust alleged that the unofficial respondents embarked upon a sustained campaign to malign the seer and the Datta Peetham through videos and social media publications circulated on YouTube and digital platforms. It was contended that the impugned content attracted substantial public attention, was being extensively shared across multiple social media platforms and could potentially disrupt harmony amongst devotees and members of the public. The petitioner specifically alleged that the videos portrayed the seer as being involved in facilitating religious conversions in collusion with Christian pastors and contained offensive, derogatory and abusive remarks directed against him.
It was contended that the content was calculated to tarnish the reputation of the institution and was capable of fuelling communal and sectarian discord. Counsel V. Seetharama Avadhani for the petitioner submitted that representations were addressed to YouTube and Google seeking immediate removal of the objectionable content. However, the platforms allegedly declined to act. The petitioner contended that such a response was inadequate in circumstances where the content complained of allegedly infringed the reputation and religious sentiments associated with an institution followed by millions of devotees worldwide. During the course of hearing, it was brought to the notice of the court that the impugned videos had garnered substantial viewership and continued to remain accessible in the public domain.
Taking note of the magnitude of dissemination, Justice Venugopal observed that mere issuance of notice to the platform operators would not suffice when millions of viewers could continue to access the content pending adjudication of the writ proceedings. Accordingly, the court directed the respondents concerned to forthwith delete the objectionable material allegedly uploaded through the Siddhaguru YouTube Channel and place compliance before the court. The court directed the station house officer, CCS, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad, to take appropriate consequential steps in accordance with law.
HC halts activity on Kondapur land
Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar of the Telangana High Court directed an immediate halt to all construction and development activity on a disputed parcel of land in Kondapur after allegations surfaced that works were being undertaken despite subsisting court-directed status quo orders. The judge was hearing a writ petition filed by businessman G. Narasimha Reddy, who alleged that authorities, particularly HYDRAA and its police wing, facilitated and permitted activities such as borewell drilling, digging of pits and land levelling in 4.23 acre land at Kondapur village, Serilingampally mandal, while simultaneously preventing him from accessing the property.
The petitioner contended that the activities were being carried out in violation of earlier status quo orders passed by the High Court as well as a division bench in relation to the subject property. It was argued that despite the subsisting directions, development works continued at the site, altering the nature of the land and adversely affecting the rights of the petitioner. During the hearing, counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the construction and development activity was being undertaken under the supervision of HYDRAA. It was contended that heavy machinery was deployed at the site and that borewell-related works were also being carried out despite the court orders. In response, counsel appearing for HYDRAA denied the allegations and reiterated that the authority was not undertaking any construction or development activity. It was submitted that HYDRAA was not involved in the activities complained of by the petitioner.
Taking note of the rival submissions, Justice Shravan Kumar directed that all persons involved in the construction activity, including those engaged in borewell-related works, shall remove all equipment and material from the site. The court directed that no construction or development activity shall be carried out on the subject land until further orders.
Bail for drunk driver who killed 2 bikers in accident
The Telangana High Court granted bail to a businessman accused of causing the deaths of two persons in a road accident while allegedly driving under the influence of alcohol, observing that the investigation substantially progressed and several witnesses were already been examined.
The court was dealing with a criminal petition filed by Kankanala Ram Kumar, seeking bail in connection with the crime registered at the Vanasthalipuram police station under the Motor Vehicles Act. According to the prosecution, the complaint was lodged on April 8, alleging that on the previous night the petitioner, while driving a car, drove in a rash and negligent manner at Omkarnagar and collided with an electric bike carrying two persons. Both riders sustained fatal injuries.
The prosecution alleged that the petitioner earlier hit another pedestrian on the same day, causing grievous injuries. Counsel for the petitioner contended that there was a delay in lodging the complaint, the investigation was complete, and there was no intention on the part of the petitioner to cause the deaths. It was argued that continued detention was unwarranted.
Opposing the plea, the additional public prosecutor submitted that the petitioner was driving in an intoxicated condition and that a test conducted after the accident confirmed alcohol consumption. The state argued that the seriousness of the allegations and the loss of two lives disentitled the petitioner from bail. After considering the rival submissions, the court noted that the petitioner was in judicial custody since April 8 and that witnesses were already examined. Taking these circumstances into account, the court granted bail subject to conditions.
Disclaimer : This story is auto aggregated by a computer programme and has not been created or edited by DOWNTHENEWS. Publisher: deccanchronicle.com
