The Delhi High Court has reached out to the Central government to respond to a petition that advocates for the inclusion of Indian Sign Language (ISL) as a mandatory accessibility feature in films shown in cinemas and on OTT platforms. The case, titled India Signing Hands Vs Union of India & Anr, highlights the need for ISL to be integrated into media content to ensure accessibility for the deaf community.
Petition Details and Court Proceedings
On July 20, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma issued a notice to the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MEITY) along with the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). The petition was filed by India Signing Hands, an organization focused on improving accessibility for the deaf. They are urging a revision of the guidelines issued by the Centre in March 2024, known as the ‘Guidelines on Accessibility Standards in the Public Exhibition of Feature Films in Cinema Theatres for Persons with Hearing and Visual Impairments.’
The petition argues that the absence of ISL in these guidelines contravenes the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, which mandates sign language interpretation for all electronic media. It calls for the effective implementation and enforcement of ISL interpretation across cinema theatres, OTT platforms, and other media formats in India.
Constitutional Rights and Legal Standpoints
Highlighting constitutional rights, the petition underscores that accessibility is a fundamental right. For individuals whose primary language is ISL, the lack of sign language interpretation in films limits their right to access information and participate in cultural expressions, as protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. The petition emphasizes that denying access through sign language perpetuates marginalization, reducing deaf individuals to second-class citizens in cultural and social contexts.
The organization had previously issued a legal notice to the Secretary of MEITY but received no response, prompting them to seek judicial intervention.
More Read
Next Steps in the Legal Process
The Court, having issued a notice on the petition, has directed the Centre to submit its response within three weeks. The next hearing is scheduled for September 2.
Advocates Amritesh Mishra and Amar Jain represented the petitioner, with the petition filed through advocates Rahul Bajaj, Amritesh Mishra, Amar Jain, and Sarah. Central government standing counsel Amrita Prakash, along with panel counsel Vivek Kumar Pandey, appeared on behalf of the Centre.
