Mandatory sharing of sports broadcast signals requires a clean feed without advertisements; Rule 5 is only clarificatory.

Section 3(1) of the Sports Broadcast Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007 was read to require a clean live sports broadcast signal shared without advertisements, including advertisements inserted by the event organiser or broadcaster. The phrase "without its advertisements" was treated as plain and contextually linked to the signal itself, so the sharing obligation extends to the broadcast in advertisement-free form. Rule 5 of the 2007 Rules was upheld as an enabling and clarificatory provision because it only requires arrangements to comply with the Act. The challenge to the rule therefore failed, and no declaration was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the obligation to simultaneously share live sports broadcast signals under Section 3 of the Sports Broadcast Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007 requires a clean feed without any advertisements, including advertisements inserted by the event organizer, and whether Rule 5 of the Sports Broadcast Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Rules, 2007 is inconsistent with the Act.

Analysis: The expression "without its advertisements" in Section 3(1) was held to admit of only one meaning. Read grammatically and contextually, the condition attaches to the live broadcast signal itself, not merely to advertisements inserted by the Indian broadcaster. The provision therefore requires that whoever transmits the live sporting broadcast must share it with Prasar Bharati without advertisements. Rule 5 was found to be only an enabling and clarificatory provision, because it merely requires the broadcaster or content rights holder to make arrangements to comply with the Act. The contention that the Act should be treated as expropriatory was rejected, and the Court also declined to examine any challenge to the vires of Section 3(1) because that provision itself was not directly assailed.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to the declaration sought, and the challenge to Rule 5 failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory language is plain, the phrase "without its advertisements" in a mandatory-sharing provision requires a clean live broadcast signal devoid of advertisements, and a rule insisting on compliance with that requirement is not ultra vires merely because it reiterates the statutory duty.

---