Neither fish nor fowl: Abhi’sex’ stripped by fellow ‘kaalakot’!!!

The controversial CD, that had cost Congress MP Manu Singhvi more than just his post of party spokesperson, has returned to haunt the senior lawyer.

In an apparent fallout of the ‘certain incident’ came to light through a CD,  the Supreme Court advocates reportedly passed a resolution to boycott him. This, when Singhvi had to give in to the mounting pressure to quit Congress amid huge criticism after the alleged CD came into light.

According to reports, the Supreme Court Bar Association recently passed a resolution deciding not to engage senior counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi, allegedly involved in a controversial CD with a lady advocate.

The resolution was adopted at a meeting of the Association wherein it was unanimously decided that Singhvi shall not be engaged by any of the advocates on record henceforth.

The Association also dispatched a copy of the resolution to Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia expressing dismay at the alleged controversial action, which it felt went against the professional conduct prescribed for the lawyers under the Advocates Act.

The SC advocates’ move comes nine days after Manu Singhvi resigned as the Congress spokesperson.

The series of controversies started after Singhvi approached Delhi High Court to stop a media house from publishing contents of the allegedly ‘forged, fabricated and morphed’ CD.

The Congress leader got some respite initially as the HC restrained the media from making public the contents of the alleged CD. The relief was shortlived as two days after the HC’s order, the content of the video went viral online.

The Congress leader’s driver admitted that he distributed a “distorted” video to take revenge on Singhvi.

Advertisements

Singhvi Sexcapade: India Today Group folded its tent without resistance!

India’s Gutless Media

Achal Mehra writes in LittleIndia

That a deep pocketed media house like the India Today Group folded its tent without resistance in the face of Abhishek Manu Singhvi’s legal threats, while an obscure activist with a checkered free speech history dared to resist, is a permanent blot on a storied media house, for which it owes its readers and the public an apology and an explanation.….But the notoriously inept, reckless and wimpish Indian media elected to censor the video, huffing and puffing about press freedoms, prurient interests and privacy rights instead to obscure their own failures at being scooped by activists and the social media. As a result, few Indians have actually seen the video, even though nearly a million people have viewed it online on YouTube, Twitvid and other social media sites.

…..The conduct of Aaj Tak, Headlines Today and India Today, among the country’s preeminent media companies, who were in possession of the CDs, is especially troubling. The India Today Group, which controls these three media houses, raised no public objection to the blatant censorship attempt, seemingly advanced no defense on behalf of the public interest, and instead, by all accounts, consented meekly to the court order and surrendered the CDs. 

.…According to Singhvi’s legal pleadings, several political leaders contacted him on March 23 and 24 about the CDs being in the possession of journalists. If true, why didHeadlines Today and Aaj Tak not broadcast them or disclose that they possessed them during the three weeks before Singhvi went to court to have them censored?

Click here, to read the full article..

Singhvi Sexcapade: Social media did not violate any high court order

Singhvi in Catch-22 situation: If Singhvi claims right to privacy (in this case),he will he would have to admit the contents of the clip was correct.

Video clippings allegedly featuring Senior Advocate and former Congress Spokesperson, Abhishek Manu Singhvi has quite literally been all over the internet. Although Singhvi was quick in securing an ex parte injunction from the Delhi High Court against three media houses who were in possession of the CD, by then the damage had already been done with the video going viral on the internet.

social media did not violate any high court order..” 

says, Apar Gupta, Partner at Advani & Co, a reputed law firm. He said in an interview given to  Bar & Bench (http://www.barandbench.com), a legal matters related website that,

“… the Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction against the driver who captured and morphed the footage.., and some television news broadcasters ( Aaj Tak, Headlines Today and the India Today Group). The interim injunction was not a John Doe injunction and would not have been applicable against any other parties except the ones, which were named as defendants in the suit…”

Pranesh Prakash of Centre of Internet and Society, another legal expert in these matters opined that:

“…. sites such as YouTube are not broadcasting sites, rather they are being used to broadcast. This distinction, which is not important when it comes to television, is critical when it comes to user-uploaded content and user-generated content. Given that there are thousands of video-sharing websites, there is no way of ensuring that all of them comply with an Indian court order. “

Asked whether public figures have a right to privacy, Apar Gupta said:

“…If (in Singhvi’s case)  privacy would have been claimed, Dr. Singhvi would have been in a unique catch-22 where to claim privacy he would have to admit the contents of the clip (if not the clip in its entirety) was correct. Hence, defamation is an easier ground where he can claim the clip was morphed and hence untrue….”

Can Abhishek Manu Singhvi file a case of defamation against the social media websites for posting the contents of the CD on their websites, Apar gupta says:

” ….Social media websites are only a platform. The case would be on firm legal footing if he gave notice to the social media websites as to the precise URL which contained the defamatory contents and they failed to act within 36 hours to take it down as per the Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011. I would also anticipate that if such a case was filed, social media websites would plead innocent dissemination as a defense.”

To the same question Pranesh Prakash says:

Again, I must clarify that social media websites have not posted the contents of the CD on their websites. Users of social media websites have done so.Should Mr. Singhvi be able to? The answer, I believe, should depend on whether the social media platforms were informed about the conduct of unlawful activity on their platforms and still chose not to remove it. The determination of unlawful activity should ideally be from a court. This, I believe is the correct interpretation of Section 79(3) of the IT Act, which deals with intermediary liability.

Read the full interview : Bar & Bench 

India – Charming state of affairs

Hot-headed democracy?

So across the country, and across the different estates—government, legislature, judiciary, media—we have a charming state of affairs in which action derives only from reaction.

Talking Media | Sevanti Ninan

If you ask whether social media is a boon or bane you should also ask whether the judiciary is a boon or otherwise, and ditto for the democratic governments we elect. For increasingly they all have their zany moments. And that is a kind word.

We’ve become such a reactive polity that our daily conduct will soon be hemmed in by injunctions issued by one or the other of these estates. All of them are on a short fuse.

If a Dalit poet and activist writes on social media about a beef-eating festival in Hyderabad, she encounters a chilling barrage of hate mail on the same trendy Twitter that the chattering classes are addicted to. Including a tweet which suggests she be raped on live television. A blogger called Kevin Gil Martin has described Twitter as lazy mob justice—an apt description of something which is more and more in evidence.

Then a video allegedly featuring Congress politician Abhishek Manu Singhvi goes viral and while Twitter reacts with glee, the always-dying-to-react Press Council chairman suggests restrictions on social media.

A newspaper goes overboard and fantasizes on its entire page 1 about troop movements, and the intent behind them. Six days later the Allahabad high court responds to a public interest litigation by directing the centre and the Uttar Pradesh government to ensure that there is no reporting on the movement of troops by the print or electronic media. A blanket ban, just like that?

Mamata Banerjee is determined to immortalize herself in social media’s rogues gallery by acting like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland. Metaphorically, it is off with their heads for anyone who makes fun of the chief minister, and a neat blow to their circulation for newspapers that do not play ball. Cyberspace responds as it’s wont to, and in vigorously waving the free speech flag prefers to ignore the more conventional skulduggery behind the cartoon-forwarding-professor coming to grief.

courtesy: livemint.com

Surely what also needs to be exposed along with Mamata’s reactive behaviour is Trinamool’s politicking-for-spoils culture that may be spreading in the state.

The ministry of information and broadcasting is amazing. Unable to get broadcasting regulation passed for a decade and a half, it resorts to malleable guidelines. Either you have a firm policy on what can be telecast in terms of adult fare, and when, or you don’t. Is this now going to be decided on a movie-by-movie basis, as happened last weekend with the Sony telecast of The Dirty Picture?

So across the country, and across the different estates—government, legislature, judiciary, media—we have a charming state of affairs in which action derives only from reaction. What happened to due process?

The Supreme Court is also attempting to curb runaway legal reporting. The difference is that it has initiated deliberations, which is as it should be. The purview of its deliberations to frame guidelines for how the media should report sub judice matters has arisen from an issue of allegedly leaked privileged communication between the counsel of Sahara Real Estate Corp. and the Securities and Exchange Board of India.

The court initiated a debate on the framing of guidelines for reporting of criminal trials to guard against any violation of Article 21 that guarantees the right of an accused to reputation and dignity and to ensure that his trial does not get prejudiced.

Then on 4 April, the court also ordered the inclusion of four more media guideline-related petitions. The issues raised in these petitions include norms for news coverage in electronic media, norms and guidelines to minimize presentation of sexual abuse and violence on TV channels, and contempt proceedings against journalists for publishing confessional statements of the accused before police.

The 2011 petition by Act Now for Harmony and Democracy (Anhad), which is one of the four the Supreme Court will take up, is also a response to the ad hoc manner in which police releases to the media material that can tarnish reputations.

Several journalists and media associations will be able to intervene in this judicial process of determining norms. That is how it should be. And where social media is concerned, too, that is how it should have been, before Markandey Katju (Press Council chairman) and Kapil Sibal (human resource development minister) chose to make pre-emptive statements.

But because nobody waits to give a measured response before they go their reactive way, all we will end up with is arbitrary curbs decreed by the government and implemented by service providers. Accompanied doubtless by an extended flurry of cyber abuse. As the current campaign seeking annulment of restrictive IT rules shows, undoing arbitrariness is going to take a lot of doing.

The poet Frances Trollope coined an evocative phrase with reference to Thomas Jefferson, referring to his “hot-headed democracy” which he said had done “a fearful injury” to his country. Who embodies it most here, I wonder: abusive free speech champions, the West Bengal chief minister, parliamentarians and the judiciary railing against the messenger rather than the bad news, or our hyperventilating TV anchors?

Sevanti Ninan is a media critic, author and editor of the media watch website thehoot.org. She examines the larger issues related to the media in a fortnightly column.

India’s perkytweets: ‘Lawyer ban gaya Donor’ starring AMS

Breaking: AMS (You know who) will be starring in the sequel of Vicky Donor. The movie is tentatively titled ‘Lawyer ban gaya Donor’ :) #fakingnews. Taking forward the humour thanks to AMS and Vicky Donor, we present to you this week’s #perkytweets. Read, Share, Smile.

 

“Takiye se samosa nikaal yaar” ~Anna Hazare #unknownquotes

— Gabbar singh (@GabbbarSingh) April 22, 2012

 

Ganguly is the new brand ambassador for Havells switches?

— VNS (@degree_kaapi) April 21, 2012

Matthews gets the wicket. But so that it does not count for Dada. Conspiracy. I want my own newspaper.

— greatbong (@greatbong) April 21, 2012

Well bowled dada! U need to put gel next time you take a wicket ! #ipl

— yuvraj singh (@YUVSTRONG12) April 21, 2012

Bangalore is so Americanised that part of Richmond Road drives on the wrong side of the road

— Nitin Pai (@acorn) April 21, 2012

A M Singhvi is a man of many talents. Usually he puts his foot in his mouth. At other times, He holds his Shirt in his mouth.

— Amit (@amsrjn) April 21, 2012

If you donate some money to Wikipedia, will you also be called Wiki Donor?

— Comedian Praveen (@Funny_Leone) April 20, 2012

Will Abhishek Manu Singhvi make it to Big Boss this year ? #AMS

— feluda (@feluda) April 20, 2012

Just saw in a resume :- “Here are my qualifications for you to overlook.” #LOL #HR@_imonlyindian

— Vivek Mishra (@iVivekHr) April 20, 2012

Why does Kunal Khemu look like the guy who brings new cylinders to your house on a cycle?

— Roshni (@DhinchakChokri) April 20, 2012

Burning Desire -When u discover that the Vaseline u applied before sex in the dark was actually Zandu balm.

— Amit Sharma (@DesolateCranium) April 19, 2012

Those MLAs in Karnataka and Gujarat were watching Abhishek Singhvi!

Subramanian Swamy (@Swamy39) April 19, 2012

They should play one Ashish Nehra dentistry benefit match. Quickly.

— Suo Motu™ (@suo_motu) April 19, 2012

A request – Please don’t raise very obvious questions. Thanks. RT@sardesairajdeep …Is Mumbai’s train system creaking?

— Amit Paranjape (@aparanjape) April 19, 2012

Lalit modi live tweeting abt Ipl is like spkng to colleagues how good was ur paycheck @ the old off

— The Artist (@prash_prince) April 16, 2012

Can’t get over this at all “Marol is the Andheri East of Andheri East” Hahahahaha :D

— Shilpa Rao (@shilparao11) April 18, 2012

The news is dat the mango of Slice ad has become Katrina’s best friend these days

— I Live Ranbir (@TheBarfigirl) April 18, 2012

BTW, If Arnab Gozwami marriez Dolly Bindra, their child would be ze most advanzed sound system the universe will ever see, noe? #Yuss

— S S Sodhi (@SimpooSir) April 18, 2012

(courtesy: BlogAdda)

‘Court banned Singhvi clip for media, not for common man’

THE BSKS ACTIVIST SAYS PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO SEE THE SEX VIDEO

YOU HAVE seen Tajinder Pal Singh Bagga earlier on TV, when he manhandled the Supreme Court lawyer and Team Anna member Prashant Bhusan last year in his chamber. Bagga is at it again. This time he has uploaded Abhishek Manu Singhvi‘s sex CD on a social networking site. ‘If sex CDs and clippings of N D Tiwari, Swami Nityanand and porn viewings of Karnataka MLAs can be aired by the media and uploaded on social networking sites, what is so different with this particular sex CD?’ he asks. In an exclusive interview with Siddheshwar Shukla, Millenium Post he says:

 that he has every right to upload the clipping and people have the right to the ‘naked truth’.

Excerpts: The sex CD/clippings of Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi is on a social networking site with your photograph. Is it your profile? Have you uploaded the clippings?

Tajinder Pal Singh Bagga: Yes, I have uploaded the clippings on the social networking site Twitvid. 

How did you obtain the clipping?

It was uploaded on YouTube for a short while at around 9 pm on Thursday. I knew it will be deactivated, so I started downloading it immediately. It was deactivated in less than 10 minutes, but by then I had downloaded it on my PC. The clippings were uploaded by several members on YouTube but deactivated soon after. So, I decided to upload it on a new social networking site. 

The court has put an injunction. Don’t you think it’s a violation of the court order?

I think I am well within my rights to upload the clippings. I have neither violated the court order nor engaged in any anti-national activity. The court has banned it for the media, not for the common man to view it. Also, hundreds of anti-India clippings containing anti-national slogans, terrorist activities, anti- national campaigns are on the you tube, but the government is not concerned about it. So why so much hue and cry on this sex CD? In my opinion, it should be left on the people to decide what is wrong and what is right? 

What if court takes action against you?

I will put my view before the court. I am ready to face whatever action the court or any authority takes against me. But why is the Congress party hell bent to ban the CD and clippings. If sex CDs of N D Tiwari, Swami Nityanand and porn viewings of Karnataka MLAs can be aired by media and uploaded on television channels, why not this CD ? Why does the Congress want to bury the truth? The party which was instrumental in other sex clippings cases has suddenly become shy to talk about the sex CD of Singhvi. The truth must come before the people. 

How do you see the entire episode of Singhvi’s sex CD?

It’s a shame for our country. A person sitting on such crucial position is engaged in such sleazy acts, that too in his office. The response of the Congress party is equally shameful, in stead of taking action they are defending Singhvi and asking him to go in hiding for some time. It’s the same party that has taken action against N D Tiwari sex CD case and was very instrumental in demanding action against Swami Nityanand and porn viewings of Karnataka MLAs in the assembly. The ban on CD is actually a gag order on the media. 

Don’t you think your life could be in danger?

I am not afraid of anybody. I do what I think is right. I have done nothing wrong. The clippings reveal what Singhvi had done. If he is in the right, he must come forward to face the public. Ban is not a solution. If he is wrong he must step down. Such people don’t have right to hold public posts. They can’t be role model for youth, neither guide the nation. I will keep on exposing such persons and highlighting issues in days to come.

‘Singhvi Sexcapade’: Media as a Protective Condom

 writes in India Wires

Yesterday, Twitter the micro-blogging site was riot with tweets on senior Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi’s ‘sexcapades’. Twitter was replete with sex based limericks featuring Abhishek Manu Singhvi and his partner, a lady lawyer. Yes, the same Abhishek Manu Singhvi who uttered the immortal words, with reference to Karnataka Legislative Assembly Porngate issue, “This is the real chaal, charitra & chehra of BJP”.

The circumstances that led to a ‘Twitter ball’ in Singhvi’s name, was the leak of an alleged porn tape, with spotlights on the sexually consenting duo. However media treated the matter rather insipidly, with brief mentions tucked away in some remote section. The inevitable ingredient when it came to covering any such instance was conspicuously missing: sensationalism. Yes, the very same sensationalism that took Nityananda to an eternal ‘Hall of Notoriety’.

Reviving the episode of Nityananda, a self styled godman, whose bedroom flings with a well known South Indian actress were caught on camera. The issue ruled the media roost for aeons together. News readers and panelists screeched the matter day and night, with varying shades of judgement being passed. Media pronounced that Nityananda was a culprit, way before the Indian judiciary did so. He was nailed mercilessly in unimaginable ways.

Isn’t the issue regarding Singhvi just the same? To be blunt, Singhvi, just like NItyananda was involved in an alleged act of ‘secret’ sex, which was caught on camera. But in the case of Singhvi, the media protected him and covered up the matter brilliantly by giving him just a passing reference. There was no onslaught and the issue was hastily swept under the carpet.

Wither lay the difference?
Apparently nowhere! But obviously somewhere !! And evidently everywhere !!!

Abhishek Manu Singhvi gives live interviews to TV channels from his residence in Delhi almost daily. He seems to have literally dropped his pants. On TV only his top half his shown so viewers don't get the whole picture.

All that we heard about the ‘Singhvi sexcapade’ was the involvement of a hapless driver, who was supposed to have served his master for years together, who left service without any notice for reasons of personal grudge and whose apparent idea of revenge was gluing his master in nothing less than a ‘sexcapade’! The story appears to be anything but credulous. Not even the most uncreative director from Bollywood will have a similar plot for a thriller movie: Manish Kumar Lal, the irate driver of Abhishek Manu Singhvi divorced himself from his master of many years without any notice. The reason: the masters’ dogs sank their teeth into the driver’s pregnant wife and with the baby born handicapped, the driver nursed vengeance against Singhvi. Added to this happens to be an allegation that his monthly payment was not upto the mark. A perfect plot for revenge to brew up in the driver’s mind. And with Nemeses working so well, the man resorted to porn as ultimate form of retribution.

In a desperate bid to cover up reality and truth, the scripted drama was given publicity. Adding to this was the prop of a hastily procured Delhi HC directive forbidding the circulation/ telecast/ broadcast of the sex CD.

And so, media gave its final verdict: “All is well”.

However, the real story seems to lie elsewhere, with reports elaborated by Daily Bhaskar.  A probe was done by them into whether the Congress spokesperson had a consensual sex with the lady lawyer or did he have sex in return of any ‘favour’. The probe led to assertions made by a Delhi-based lawyer Swaty Singh Malik, who revealed quantum about the episode through her tweets. Her tweets hinted that “the Congress leader had consensual sex with a lady lawyer who is in her mid 40s”. Reproducing hitherto from Daily Bhaskar:

A Delhi-based lawyer claimed on Twitter to have known the details about the alleged CD. Her tweets hinted that the Congress leader had consensual sex with a lady lawyer who is in her mid 40s.

“@shilpitewari i know the female. She was not exploited.She s vinfluential even otherwise. Happened in his office. She is about 45-50yrs old,” tweeted Delhi-based lawyer Swaty Singh Malik.

Her comments followed the tweets: “@shilpitewari it has to be consensual or else he can much better/younger girls if he wants to exploit.”

The lawyer also mentioned that the lady in the CD too is very rich and influential and that so did not have sex with Singhvi in return of some favour.

Notably, Singhvi had alleged that the CD was “forged, concocted, morphed and fabricated”.

Here are a few tweets on Swati Singh Malik’s wall on the ‘objectional CD’ of Singhvi.

Swaty Singh Malik ‏ @SwatySMalik: “@prachivsharma doctored tou pata nahi. But feel bad for the lady lawyer as well. So much crap without evidence.”

Swaty Singh Malik ‏ @SwatySMalik: “@DKMahant heard about it in the morning and was disgusted ! Feel bas for the lady lawyer being dragged in!

Swaty Singh Malik ‏ @SwatySMalik: “@shilpitewari i know the female. She was not exploited.She s vinfluential even otherwise. Happened in his office. She is about 45-50yrs old.”

Swaty Singh Malik ‏ @SwatySMalik: “@shilpitewari I assume you know her too. I do not agree that they had sex just for judgeship. U think it’s that simple to become a judge?NO!”

Swaty Singh Malik ‏ @SwatySMalik: “@shilpitewari it has to be consensual or else he can much better/younger girls if he wants to exploit.”

Swaty Singh Malik ‏ @SwatySMalik: “@Simblee what’ve know is that thy didn’t record it .. A staff member did and then blackmailed him.”

Swaty Singh Malik ‏ @SwatySMalik: “@SwarupKS see she too is v rich and v influential also has a great legal practice. So sex only for favour is unlikely.”

Unfortunately, strangely and as expected, many of the tweets made by Swaty Singh Malik have ‘disappeared’ from Twitter timeline. However, here are some of the crucial ones that remain as evidence, as they were retweeted by others. The very fact that the tweets stand missing sing the song “Something- is- fishy-la- la- la”……..

Now from the side of the audience, the citizens who witnessed the scripted drama a few questions stand uncleared. Usually the hounding  media sleuths takes care of these issues. But since they suffered from a rare version of amnesia and forgot to swoop down on the issue and grant any kind of coverage to the same, the audience stands lost.

Dear media, the very questions that you ask and the very answers you furnish to those, yourself are listed below. Care to give us answer?

  • Was the driver so tech savvy that he was skilled in morphing, leading to creation of porn? Why then was he working as a driver, without trying his hand in the IT scenario?
  • It appears that the driver is person of speculations. In that case, why did he not file a case and seek a claim when the dog bite episode took place?
  • Isn’t he a psychopath, to think of revenge in such extreme terms, considering the fact that extortion, kidnap, poisoning are other plausible ways?
  • And if so, Singhvi, a reputed lawyer and an evident smart alec as  seen by his stock of repartee widely publicized on news channels did not ever discern that his driver happens to be a psycopath?
  • Reproducing Rajdeep Sardesai’s Tweets:

Breaking now on CNN IBN: Abhishek Manu Singhvi ‘opts out’ of cong party briefings. Claims he is ‘unwell’.

Now, looking at tweets made by Raja of IBN Live, isn’t it surprising that the hounding media willingly kept away from Singhvi, letting the ‘depressed soul’ some ‘rest’, given other occasions they have been known to shadow and stalk any ‘hapless victim/ prey’?

Like everyone who watched, read and partook in the screening of the ‘Singhvi Sexcapade’ drama, I too am inclined to give my verdict. There is a tweet i found striking. Will go by the same, support it and declare my verdict: Singhvi is guilty!!