Don’t miss the latest developments in business and finance.

HC closes petition seeking action on actor Prakash Raj

Image
Press Trust of India Chennai
Last Updated : Aug 17 2015 | 10:42 PM IST
The Madras High Court today closed a PIL filed against actor Prakash Raj, objecting to an advertisement which was allegedly "degrading and demeaning" to women and girls of marriageable age and seeking action against the actor who had endorsed the advertisement.
The first bench, comprising Chief Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice T S Sivagnanam, on the PIL by S Safiath, said in its order that the focus seems to be on the first Prakash Raj as he happens to be an actor."
"We are, thus, not inclined to entertain the PIL and it is for the petitioner to first put the concerned persons advertising their product to notice and to take action in accordance with law thereafter in view of the various remedies available. The petition is closed in the aforesaid terms", the judges said.
The petitioner sought a direction to the Chennai Police Commissioner to remove the hoardings, which "degrades and demeans" women and girls of marriageable age by calling her 'tension' instead of girl and to ban the broadcast of TV commercials endorsed by actor Prakash Raj in all leading channels.
She also sought to stop the company from advertising it in newspapers and press and to direct the Chennai Police Commissioner to take action against the actor and the company responsible for treating women allegedly disrespectfully.
She made Prakash Raj, who appeared in the advertisement as the first, the Commissioner of Police as the second and the Corporation of Chennai as third respondents.
The bench said in its order that "the petitioner has not served any notice on the persons propagating the advertisement to desist from such practice nor has the petitioner approached the broadcasting association making any grievance".
"Interestingly, the petition has been filed impleading only the cine actor as a party, with the Commissioner of Police and the Commissioner of Corporation impleaded as second and third respondents", the bench said.

More From This Section

First Published: Aug 17 2015 | 10:42 PM IST

Next Story