I&B Ministry
Jaitley issues warning on titillating programming
Indian information and broadcasting minister Arun Jaitley issued a stern warning to TV channels which are banking on nudity and semi-nudity or provocative programming to attract audiences and generate viewership.
“People have protested about how some organisations are taking advantage of liberal norms in India. Why should you have a stripper in a airconditioner ad which was shown recently on television? Why should a condom commercial be so erotic and put on television for all to see,” he asked. “If fashion is to be marketed in terms of transparent clothing, and every decency violated on TV screens, I don’t know if we can allow that. The cable and satellite industry has to morally police itself. Also advertisers. There are issues which affect our sensibilities. I don’t think Indian society is prepared for this. We want a liberal regime. Hard censorship is abhorrent to any democracy. But if industry is not interested then we may have to step in.”
Jaitley was speaking while addressing a gathering organised by FICCI on what Indian entertainment should be doing to ensure rapid growth in the new millennium on 30 March.
Jaitley was pretty caustic about his ministry’s position on this issue. Should the government step in when we have control devices such as child locks, he was asked. Should it not be the responsibility of the parent or adult?
He responded icicly: “The industry has absolutely no responsibility does it? TV censorship in India is not in the form of pre-censorship. It is like the green channel in the Customs where the onus is on you to declare honestly. But if we allow some channels which are not comlying honestly than five others will get in and take advantage of our liberal attitude. ”
Going by Jaitley’s statements it is quite likely that the government may shortly come out with a ban against the Michael Adam promoted Fashion Television, which is generating high viewerships in India mainly because of scantily clad models. Jaitley had banned Russian channel TB6 last year because it showed pornographic films and had ordered Indian cable networks to stop carrying it on their networks. Most Indian cable TV operators have complied since.
I&B Ministry
India turns up the heat on piracy, orders Telegram to axe 3,142 channels and blocks 800 websites
New legal teeth, nodal officers and notices to intermediaries signal that the government is done playing nice with copyright thieves
NEW DELHI: India’s war on film piracy just got significantly more aggressive. The government has ordered Telegram to remove 3,142 channels distributing pirated content, blocked access to around 800 websites through internet service providers, and put the full weight of freshly sharpened legislation behind the crackdown. The message from New Delhi is unambiguous: the free ride for copyright thieves is over.
Minister of state for information and broadcasting L. Murugan spelled out the legal architecture to the Lok Sabha on Wednesday. The Cinematograph (Amendment) Act, 2023, he said, now contains specific provisions designed to make piracy a genuinely painful proposition. Sections 6AA and 6AB prohibit unauthorised recording and transmission of films, with violations attracting a minimum of three months’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs 3 lakh. At the upper end, offenders face three years behind bars and fines of up to 5 per cent of a film’s audited gross production cost — a figure that, for a big-budget production, could run into crores.
The legislation also gives the government powers to act against intermediaries hosting infringing content, by notifying them under Section 79(3) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and compelling takedowns and blocking actions. Under Section 79(3)(b), intermediaries are legally required to remove or disable access to unlawful content upon receiving government notice or court orders. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, add a further layer of obligation, requiring platforms to ensure their services are not used to host or distribute content that violates copyright or proprietary rights.
To put enforcement into practice, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has established a dedicated institutional mechanism, complete with nodal officers to receive complaints. Copyright holders, authorised representatives or individuals can report piracy through a prescribed format, after which the government issues notices to intermediaries to disable access to infringing links.
The most headline-grabbing action came on 11 March 2026, when Telegram was formally notified under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act and directed to remove and disable 3,142 channels found to be distributing unauthorised content belonging to OTT platforms, content owners and producers. The complaints that triggered the action came from OTT platforms including JioCinema and Amazon Prime Video, which alleged that copyrighted films, web series and other material were being shared on the platform on a massive scale. Telegram’s architecture, with its large file-sharing limits and capacity for user anonymity, has made it a favoured vehicle for exactly this kind of large-scale piracy.
The Telegram action sits within a broader pattern of escalating enforcement. Just days before the Lok Sabha statement, the ministry banned five OTT platforms for streaming obscene content: MoodXVIP, Koyal Playpro, Digi Movieplex, Feel and Jugnu. In July 2025, the Centre ordered the blocking of 25 OTT platforms accused of streaming obscene, vulgar or pornographic material, a list that included ALTT, ULLU, Big Shots App, Desiflix, Boomex, Navarasa Lite, Gulab App, Kangan App, Bull App, Jalva App, ShowHit, Wow Entertainment, Look Entertainment, Hitprime, Feneo, ShowX, Sol Talkies, Adda TV, HotX VIP, Hulchul App, MoodX, NeonX VIP, Fugi, Mojflix and Triflicks.
Rule 3(1)(b) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, provides the regulatory hook for those actions, prohibiting platforms from hosting content that is obscene, pornographic, invasive of privacy, gender-harassing, racially or ethnically objectionable, or that promotes hatred and violence.
For an industry that loses billions of rupees annually to piracy, the direction of travel is welcome. The question, as always, is not whether the laws exist, but whether the enforcement machinery can keep pace with the ingenuity of those determined to circumvent it. Three thousand channels down, and the pirates are already busy opening three thousand more.
