SC says regulation of explicit content on OTT 'falls in executive's domain'
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih noted that the petition raised an important issue, which falls under the executive or legislative domain
 "SC says regulation of explicit content on OTT 'falls in executive's domain'")
The Supreme Court on Monday sought responses from the Centre and others regarding a petition seeking a directive to take necessary measures to ban the streaming of sexually explicit content on over-the-top (OTT) and social media platforms.
A bench of Justices BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih noted that the petition raised an important issue, which falls under the executive or legislative domain. "As it is, there are allegations that we are encroaching upon the legislature and executive power," Justice Gavai remarked during the proceedings.
The bench instructed Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, to address the matter raised in the petition. Mehta informed the court that some regulations on this issue already existed, while others were being considered.
The court was hearing a plea filed by five petitioners who have also sought instructions for the formation of a national content control authority to prohibit sexually explicit content on OTT and social media platforms. Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain was representing the petitioners.
The remarks by Justice Gavai come after Vice President Jagdeep Dhankhar criticised a recent Supreme Court order directing the President to act within a specific timeframe on bills sent by governors for consideration. Taking a jab at the judiciary, Dhankar had argued that India was never meant to have a democracy where judges function as lawmakers, the executive, and even as a "super Parliament".
The top court had earlier ruled that when a governor reserves a bill for the President under Article 201 of the Constitution, a decision must be taken within three months. The ruling was part of a verdict that criticised Tamil Nadu Governor RN Ravi’s prolonged inaction and withholding of assent to state bills. While delivering the verdict, a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan had stated that the discharge of functions by the President under Article 201 was amenable to judicial review.
Warning against what he saw as "judicial overreach", Dhankhar said, “We never bargained for democracy for this day."
Expressing concern over the erosion of constitutional boundaries, the Vice President hit out the judiciary, stating, “So we have judges who will legislate, who will perform executive functions, who will act as super Parliament, and absolutely have no accountability because law of the land does not apply to them."