I&B Ministry
Tiranga TV criticises govt move to restrict freedom of speech of TV content
MUMBAI: Tiranga TV has criticised the government’s move to censure it, saying it is unjustified. Recently, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) sent a notice to newly launched news channel Tiranga TV regarding telecast of a media briefing of Pakistan army spokesperson major general Asif Ghafoor on the Pulwama terror attack.
“We have made it clear in our reply that we strongly condemn the attack on our forces and have in unequivocal term criticised Pakistan for patronising terrorism. However, we feel, by issuing the show cause notices to channels for airing the press briefing of Pakistani army spokesperson, the government once again is sitting in judgement upon content of free speech, expressed through the medium of television broadcast,” Veecon Media and Broadcasting Ltd president Deepak Choudhry commented in a reply to the notice.
After the telecast, MIB warned Tiranga TV for violating the programming code of the Cable TV Networks Act by telecasting prohibitive content. The ministry also laid the logic that for the entire duration, there was no clarification or intervention from the channel on the correctness of the claims being made.
As per reports, 12 other channels have also received such notices including ABP News, Surya Samachar, Zee Hindustan, TOTAL TV, ABP Majha, News18 Lokmat, Jai Maharashtra, News18 Gujarati, News24, News Nation, Sandesh News and News18 India.
In a 14 February directive, the MIB warned all private TV channels to strictly adhere to programming guidelines, which came in the wake of the J&K attack. Channels were told not to show content that is likely to encourage or incite violence or contains anything against maintenance of law and order or which promotes anti-national attitudes and/or contains anything affecting the integrity of the nation and ensure that no such content is telecast which is violative of the codes. This was even passed around to channels by NBA, NBSA and IBF.
The MIB said that Tiranga TV is in violation of the code and also this advisory by telecasting the news piece. Tiranga TV is backed by Congress leader Kapil Sibal and was recently given the permission by the Telecom Disputes Settlement Appellate Tribunal to change its name from Harvest TV to Tiranga TV.
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.
