Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd., Through Senior Manager Akshay Mahadik v. The Inspector Of Police And ORS.
Digitally signed by TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE Date:
2025.07.07 11:32:01 +0530 TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3607 OF 2025 Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd.
... Petitioner versus The Inspector of Police, at the instance of Nodal Cyber Police Station, Mumbai and Others ... Respondents ...
Mr.Sanjog Parab with Mr.Mohan Rao, Ms.Sulabha Rane, Ms.Sakshi Bardkar, Mr.Pranjal Pandey and Mr.Sangram Parab for the Petitioner. Mr.S.V.Gavand, APP for the Respondent -State. Mr.Prafull R. Wagh, Police Inspector, Maharashtra Cyber is present. ...
CORAM
:
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & M. M. SATHAYE, JJ.
DATE :
4th July, 2025 P.C.:- 1.
This matter was mentioned at 11.00 am expressing grave urgency.
2.
After briefly noting the version, we placed the matter on the production board and requested the learned APP to take instructions. 3.
The Petitioner received a notice dated 30th June, 2025 under 1/4
Section 168 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS, 2023). The subject was 'Refrain from Making Objectionable or Controversial Statements'. A reference was made to 'Complaint received against "Tum Se Tum Tak" TV Serial'. The following is the text of the notice drafted by Shri Prafull Wagh, Police Inspector, Nodal Cyber Police Station, Maharashtra Cyber, Mumbai :
"The Office of the Additional Director General of Police, Maharashtra Cyber, serves as the Nodal Office for all cyber-related crimes in the State of Maharashtra. With reference to the above subject, you are hereby advised to refrain from arising the telecast of the aforesaid show "Tum Se Tum Tak" until the completion of the enquiry, as per the provision of Section 168 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023. Failure to comply with these directives may result in serious legal consequences".
4.
The learned APP has been briefed by Shri Prafull Wagh, Police Inspector, Nodal Cyber Police Station, Maharashtra Cyber, Mumbai. On instructions, he tenders a photostat copy of the communication dated 3rd July 2025, bearing the subject 'Closure of application inquiry'. The said communication is taken on record and marked as 'X-1' for identification. 5.
When called upon, the learned APP is instructed to state that this communication was sent to the Officer of the Petitioner, who has 2/4
verified this Petition, via WhatsApp message at 12:00 noon today. Therefore, a reason to doubt that this is an ante-dated communication. 6.
We could have disposed off this Petition in the light of the closure of the complaint. However, the learned Senior Advocate representing the Petitioner submits that an Officer of the Petitioner himself went to the address of the purported Complainant, Shri Sunil Mahendra Sharma, which is mentioned along with the mobile number on the complaint dated 12th June, 2025, at page Nos. 26 and 27 of the Petition paper book. The Officer of the Petitioner was informed by the security guard at the said address that no person, carrying the name mentioned in the complaint, resides at the address specified in the said complaint. This deepens the controversy since, prima facie, it appears that the Police Inspector acted highhandedly while issuing the notice dated 30th June 2025, directing the Petitioner to refrain from airing the television show, Tum Se Tum Tak, until the completion of the inquiry under Section 168 of the BNSS, 2023.
7.
We are, therefore, placing this matter on 8th July, 2025, in the supplementary board, to enable the concerned Police Officer to produce the 3/4
said Complainant before the Court along with his Aadhar Card, Election Commission Identity Card, and proof of his permanent address. (M. M. SATHAYE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) 4/4