As the petition filed in public interest by NGO "HELP" came up for resumed hearing, Honey Singh's counsel Anmol Rattan Singh and Kanwalvir Singh Kang referred to the singer's written statement to say he has "fallen a victim to his own celebrity status". They contended controversial song "Main Hun Balatkari" was not sung by him, and apparently some other "Honey Singh" or another person impersonating him, had sung that song.
Sidhu argued that the police registered an FIR against Honey Singh on May 16 under the High Court directions. As such, the High Court should intervene in the matter. The Bench, however, expressed its intention for not interfering with the FIR. The Bench observed that Honey Singh might resort to appropriate remedy available to him in law for redressal of his grievance by taking such defence.
Petitioner's counsel HC Arora submitted that the film censor board had played a useful role in checking vulgarity and obscenity in films; and a similar mechanism should be set up for non-movie songs.
The High Court then disposed of the PIL by observing that it was for the state government to decide whether it wanted to set up a mechanism or authority for screening vulgar or obscene songs, and for stopping misuse of information and technology by uploading such songs on the internet. It was also for the state government to decide what should be "checks and balances" to be incorporated in such a mechanism.
