IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI ANIL R. DAVE AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO : 14928 of 2009 Between: 1 C. Raghavan C/o. N. Thangappan Executive Member of Lok Satta Party, 946, Suraram Colony, Jeedimetla, R.R District 2 G.Narender, S/o Gonaiah Executive Member of Lok Satta Party R/o.2-11-1798/7/A/19, Ambernagar, Warasiguda, Secunderabad ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 Government of India, Information of Broadcasting, New Delhi 2 Star Plus Channel, Rep. by its Managing Director, Mumbai 3 Government of Andhra Pradesh, Information and Broadcasting, Secretariat buildings Hyderabad 4 Principal Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Home affairs, Home Department, New Delhi .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents, i.e. relaying the Serial "SACH KE SAMNE" is illegal, improper and against the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondents to stop the relaying the Serial i.e., SACH KE SAMNE" in Television Programme in STAR PLUS Channel. Counsel for the Petitioners: MR. JAYANTI.S.C.SEKHAR Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 4: MR. A. RAJASHEKAR REDDY (ASST. SOLICITOR GENERAL) Counsel for the Respondent No.2: None Appeared Counsel for the Respondent No.3: G.P. FOR INFORMATION & BROADCASTING The Court made the following : ORDER: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Anil R. Dave) This is a pubic interest litigation wherein the petitioner has submitted that the television programme Sach Ke Samne, which is being telecast by Star Plus Channel, is not in good taste because certain personal questions are put to the participants. It has been fairly admitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioners that it is optional for a person to participate in the programme and those who participate were put some questions which, according to the petitioners, might be embarrassing also. In the circumstances, it has been submitted in the petition that the aforestated programme should be banned. We do not see any public interest involved in the petition for the reason that if it is an embarrassing condition to a participant, the participant should not voluntarily participate in the programme. The petition is therefore rejected with no order as to costs. ______________ ANIL R. DAVE, CJ ______________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J 24.7.2009 bnr