Power TV chief Rakesh Shetty sentenced to three months’ jail for contempt of court
Bengaluru:In a significant legal development, a Bengaluru Rural District Civil Court has sentenced Power TV chief Rakesh Shetty to three months’ simple imprisonment for violating an interim court order in a civil case filed by senior IPS officer B.R. Ravikanthegouda. The court held that the accused had willfully disobeyed judicial directions, amounting to contempt of court.
The order was passed by Bengaluru Rural District Civil Court judge Abdul Saleem after hearing a contempt petition filed by IPS officer Ravikanthegouda. The petition alleged that despite clear interim directions issued by the court on September 8, 2023, the respondent continued actions that violated the spirit and letter of the court’s restraint order.
In its ruling, the court observed that Rakesh Sanjeev Shetty, Managing Director of Power Smart Media Private Limited, had knowingly ignored the interim order and acted in defiance of the judiciary. “It is proved that the respondent has violated the interim order issued by this court and has acted in disobedience of judicial directions,” the court noted in its judgment.
As part of the sentence, the court ordered that Rakesh Shetty be lodged in jail for a period of three months. In an unusual direction, the court further stated that the expenses incurred during Shetty’s imprisonment would be borne by the complainant, IPS officer B.R. Ravikanthegouda.
The case stems from a civil dispute in which Ravikanthegouda had sought court intervention against alleged violations by the media house and its head. While detailed facts of the original dispute were not elaborated in the order, the court made it clear that compliance with judicial orders is mandatory, irrespective of an individual’s position or influence.
Legal experts say the ruling sends a strong message on the sanctity of court orders and the consequences of contempt. The verdict has triggered widespread discussion in media and legal circles, given the high-profile nature of both the petitioner and the respondent. Further legal options, including appeal, are expected to be explored by the convicted party.
