Double standards for cinema and OTT, asserts Amod K Kanth

Speaking at a press conference at the Press Club of India on July 31, Mr. Amod K. Kanth, retired IPS and former DIG (Investigation) CBI and other speakers called upon the makers of the web series ‘The Hunt – The Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Case’ aired on Sony LIV to make amends for defaming the high level SIT (Special Investigation Team) investigating the case or withdraw the series.

Introducing the speakers to the media, Mr Amitabh Srivastava Head Media and Communication Prayas said that cinema had changed with time. From Mughal-e-Azam in the 50s the Gen Z was now rushing to watch new actors in Saiyarra.
From the big screen cinema had entered now our bed-rooms via the OTT specially, after the Corona and everyone in the family now had access to it.
Being the first CBI member as DIG CBI to reach the spot on May 23, Mr Kanth played a key role in the actual investigation that was the most complicated political assassination in the country as it involved foreign characters who used their affinity with Tamil ethnicity to create a web of terror.

He strongly criticized the series for distorting facts, depicting wrong sequences of events, and defaming him and the other officers of the SIT.
He wondered how the makers could use the real names and identities of the officers without their ‘consent’, along with unethical dramatizations, including custodial torture, use of abusive language, and an objectionable arrest scene of a female terrorist.
According to him,such liberties in the name of creative license damage his moral and intellectual character in the world as he is also an active social worker as Founder and Mentor of Prayas JAC Society.
In his inimitable style he narrated the exact sequence of actual events, contrasting them with the misleading and defamatory sequences shown in the series for creating a thriller, as admitted by the producer Nagesh Kukunoor himself in an interview where he said that he knew the real sequence of truth but chose to create a story.
Having challenged the film in a court of law Mr Kanth explained how every step of investigation had followed due process of law which has been totally dispensed with for convenience.
He asserted that the investigation team, under the leadership of IG D.R. Karthikeyan and contributions from officers like the late Mr. Amit Verma, worked with utmost professionalism and integrity. The depiction of the LTTE suspects, misuse of sensitive content (what was the Censor Board doing).
This degrading and demonising of the CBI team he said, had sullied the reputation and credibility of of a historic investigation and defamed some who are no longer alive to defend themselves.
He asked journalists to read his own book, where the actual case details have been systematically and truthfully documented.
Adding to his version was Major General Manik Sabharwal, the then Officer Commanding of the NSG Bomb Disposal Unit, who was responsible for the forensic analysis of the IED used in the assassination. Major General Sabharwal described how, a few days after the incident, he was deployed to Madras (now Chennai) and examined key forensic evidence including ball bearings, wires, toggle switches, and remnants of the suicide bombers vest. Based on his findings, he confirmed the use of a suicide vest containing a Singapore Fragmentation Grenade (SFG) initiated by dual toggle switches and powered by a 9-volt battery. He clarified that the actual technical investigation was conducted by him in coordination with Mr. Kanth’s team not by Mr. Chandrasekhar, as inaccurately portrayed in the series. General Sabharwal emphasized that interpreting explosive devices requires deep technical expertise, which the show failed to reflect.
Senior Advocate Rajan Raj of the Supreme Court who has filed a case of defamation on behalf of Mr Kanth, expressed grave concern over the legal and ethical breaches committed by the web series.
He stated that the series not only defames individual CBI officers but also maligns the institution as a whole by misrepresentation. He emphasized that when actual names and events are used, content creators are expected to maintain documentary-level integrity and not let their imagination damage reputations. Highlighting the lack of regulatory oversight on streaming platforms, he warned that such unchecked disinformation, could have serious implications for public perception and national integrity, and may soon require judicial intervention to establish boundaries for permissible creative liberties.
Mr. Dilip Sharan, former CEO of a sports media channel, said that there must be clear regulatory boundaries to define how far creative liberties can go, especially when real people and events are involved.
Citing the 2019 Consumer Protection Act’s stance against misleading advertisements, he argued that similar safeguards should apply to media content. He expressed concern that Mr. Kanth’s decades-long reputation had been unfairly damaged, impacting not just his personal credibility but also the values and public trust associated with the organization he represents. Mr. Sharan noted that while
Others present among the well informed audience, including well known film producers expressed serious concern that the I and B Ministry was adopting double standards for films and the OTT series which are available to even children at the push of a button.