(1) THIS is a ptition under Article 32 ofthe Constitution fled by a lawyer in public interest seeking to banthe exhibition of T.V. sriai Tamas, on the ground that it offends or is likely to offend public order and public morality and create public danger. Detailed arguments have been advanced before us. We propose to considerthe detailed argu- ments in a Judgment which will be delivered shortiy WE dismiss this writ ptition under Article 32 ofthe Constitution because we are satisfied ontheevidence ofthe Board of Censors as well asthe views expressed bythe two leamed Judges of the High court in Appeal No. 96 of 1988 arising out of W.P. No. 201 of 1988 entitled Govind Nihalani v. Union ofindia and Others which is aiso before us in th spcial leave ptition, thatthe effect is not likely to affect order or in th commission of any offence. We dismissthe spcial leave ptition. We are aiso ofthe opinion, having consideredthe facts and circumstances of this case, this case is not a fit case for interfrence under Article 32 ofthe Constitution. It does not affect any fundamental right or likely to affect any fundamental rights. No order as to costs.