I&B Ministry
Action against GECs almost three times more than against news channels
NEW DELHI: Action was taken by the Information and Broadcasting Ministry (I&B) 74 times against different television channels in the three years between April 2011 and March 2014.
Of these, action mostly in the form of advisories was taken suo moto by the I&B Ministry 12 times – seven against general entertainment channels and five against news channels.
Of the balance 62 cases, there were reports of violation by GECs 46 times and news channels 16 times.
In 16 cases, channels had to stop transmission for varying periods, while other punishments were either warnings or directives to run apology scrolls.
There were only six cases relating to advertisements, four of them about deodorants and two about liquor.
There is only one case where a channel was prohibited from telecasting a certain film in day-time following a Court order.
The rest of the cases were about telecast of adult certified films before 11.00 pm or in day-time, screening films without showing the certificate of the Central Board of Film Certification, obscene or vulgar content, scenes denigrating children or likely to affect them, revealing identity of sexually abused women or children, inflammatory or provocative matter, scenes that showed the lower castes or dalits in a bad light, and scenes promoting superstition or blind belief.
Individually, action was initiated against Bindass five times and three times each against Sony Entertainment Television, Colors, and Manoranjan TV. Action was initiated twice in the case of Channel V, SS TV, FTV and Comedy Central. 40 other channels faced action only once each.
The advisories from the Ministry related to guidelines relating to taking children in TV programmes or hiding identity of trauma-affected children, telecast of quiz-based programmes, against programmes promoting superstition and blind belief, news about movement of troops, showing as news scenes from uncertified films, barring telecast of a round-the-clock public demonstration, comparison of prime minister’s speech on Independence Day with that of other leaders, and live telecast of Republic Day parade from Doordarshan with sign language interpretation.
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.
