Sign in

SC rejects plea for 24-hour Sindhi language channel on Doordarshan

Prasar Bharati argued in the high court that, given the population of approximately 2.6 million Sindhi speakers nationwide, a full-time Sindhi channel would not be sustainable

Updated on: Oct 14, 2024, 13:21:49 IST
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea by a non-profit for issuing directives to the Union government to establish a 24-hour Sindhi language channel on Doordarshan to sustain and even revive the Sindhi culture and language.

The public broadcaster also highlighted that programmes in Sindhi are regularly broadcast on regional channels. (Representative file photo)
The public broadcaster also highlighted that programmes in Sindhi are regularly broadcast on regional channels. (Representative file photo)

“Can there be a fundamental right to have a channel started by a public broadcaster? No citizen can say that in pursuant to my fundamental rights, a separate channel in that language must be set up...there are other ways, which can be more effective,” stated a bench led by Chief Justice of India Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud.

The bench, including justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, affirmed the Delhi high court’s May 27 order that a judicial mandate for a dedicated Sindhi channel was not tenable when there were other languages like Dogri, Santali, Bodo, and Sanskrit that are, like Sindhi, included in the 8th schedule of the Constitution, but have no dedicated government-run television channel. The high court had further pointed out that DD Girnar, DD Rajasthan and DD Sahyadri were broadcasting Sindhi programmes, which makes the test of “adequate coverage” contemplated in existing laws.

Also Read: Spice of Life: Embracing tech: When baby boomers go digital

During the hearing, senior advocate Indira Jaising, representing NGO Sindhi Sangat, argued that a dedicated public broadcast channel would be a significant step in preserving the Sindhi language. She further emphasised that the top court could mould the relief suitably in case it was not inclined to entertain the plea for a dedicated news channel.

“The idea is to ensure that the Sindhi culture and language is duly sustained and promoted. The State has a duty to protect the linguistic interests,” said Jaising.

The Supreme Court, however, suggested that other avenues could be explored for language preservation, granting Jaising liberty to move a fresh plea with appropriate reliefs.

The NGO had challenged the Delhi high court’s May 27 order, which upheld Prasar Bharati’s decision not to launch a full-time Sindhi language channel. The high court had stated that the NGO failed to establish a legal or constitutional right to demand a dedicated channel, and its plea was therefore “misplaced.”

According to the court, Section 12(2)(d) of the Prasar Bharati (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990, mandates “adequate coverage” for India’s diverse languages and cultures, but does not necessarily require a separate channel for each language.

Prasar Bharati argued in the high court that, given the population of approximately 2.6 million Sindhi speakers nationwide, a full-time Sindhi channel would not be sustainable. The public broadcaster also highlighted that programmes in Sindhi are regularly broadcast on regional channels such as DD Girnar, DD Rajasthan and DD Sahyadri, which cover areas with high concentrations of Sindhi speakers—namely, Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Maharashtra. These channels are accessible nationwide and are available on the DTH1 platform.

The high court then noted that Prasar Bharati’s decision to air Sindhi programming on existing regional channels appeared to meet the “adequate coverage” standard as outlined in the Prasar Bharati Act. It concluded that this approach was reasonable and rational, given the distribution of Sindhi speakers across the country.

  • Utkarsh Anand
    ABOUT THE AUTHOR
    Utkarsh Anand

    Utkarsh Anand is the National Legal Editor at Hindustan Times, where he leads the newspaper's coverage of the Supreme Court, constitutional law, the judiciary and the Union law ministry. He joined Hindustan Times in 2020 after stints at Press Trust of India (PTI), The Indian Express and CNN-News18, and has over two decades of experience reporting on law, governance and public policy. His work has focussed on some of India's most consequential constitutional and legal developments, including the Supreme Court's judgments on Article 370, marriage equality, decriminalisation of homosexuality, the Babri Masjid dispute, electoral reforms and judicial appointments. He specialises in making complex legal proceedings and judgments accessible to readers while examining their wider social and political impact. Beyond daily reportage, Utkarsh has led investigative projects and enterprise reporting that have shaped public debate and prompted institutional responses. His work has received several journalism awards, including the Ramnath Goenka Excellence in Journalism Award. As National Legal Editor, he has also played a key role in expanding Hindustan Times' legal journalism footprint, mentoring reporters and strengthening coverage across platforms. A Chevening South Asia Journalism Programme Fellow, Utkarsh regularly writes analyses on the judiciary and constitutional issues, and his reporting is widely followed by lawyers, judges, policymakers, academics and readers seeking clarity on India's evolving legal landscape.Read More