Shilpa Shetty and her attorneys were ordered by the Bombay High Court on Monday, to divide dependent media into two categories: private vloggers and bloggers and conventional media outlets. The judge was particularly concerned about the actress’s children’s privacy and safety. After her husband Raj Kundra was arrested in the porn film racket, Shilpa filed a lawsuit against several media sites for allegedly defamatory stories and videos against her and her family.
Raj was detained in July on charges of creating and selling pornographic materials for profit. On Monday, September 20, he was freed on bond.
The Bombay High Court, hearing Shilpa Shetty’s complaint, stated on Monday that it is worried about the privacy and safety of Shilpa’s children – Samisha Kundra and Viaan Raj Kundra. Justice Gautam Patel said, ‘I am not concerned about Shilpa Shetty… She will handle herself. I am more concerned about her minor children. Media reports on Shetty’s personal life with her children are of concern. In such matters, it is the children who are at the centre.’
Shetty had asked the court for a gag order on the media, but it was denied. The court, on the other hand, had ordered the three videos uploaded on YouTube by three private individuals, be removed and not to be uploaded again.
Also Read: Kerala’s Calicut University makes anti-dowry bond must for admissions
The court stated while distinguishing between media houses and news bloggers: ‘Traditional media will understand the rationale and competent advice. We cannot say the same about these private vloggers and bloggers.’
‘Most of the defendants have agreed to remove the objectionable posts,’ Shilpa Shetty’s lawyer, Abhinav Chandrachud, told the court on Monday. The court questioned Chandrachud why they were in such a hurry to get the plea heard while discussing the matter of the gag order. ‘You (Shetty) are not going to be able to get a permanent injunction (against media reports) then why are you in a rush. This matter pertaining to Raj Kundra is going to go on for some more time,’ Justice Patel said. The court will hear the matter again on October 1.
Post Your Comments