E-Paper
Courts not to sit in appeal over censor board certificate: SC on ‘Adipurush’ row
Adipurush row: The Supreme Court also stayed the Allahabad HC order that summoned director Om Raut, producer Bhushan Kumar, and dialogue writer Manoj Muntashir
NEW DELHI: Courts should not become a forum to sit in appeal over certificates granted by the censor board for the public exhibition of movies, the Supreme Court said on Friday while dismissing a petition demanding revocation of the certificate for the movie ‘Adipurush’ for allegedly hurting religious sentiments of Hindus.
A bench of justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia noted that cinematographic depictions play with the original material, to an extent it is possible. “The exception itself provides that a representation may not be a replica of the text itself. A body is already there to look into these aspects and in the present case, a certificate has been issued,” said the bench, referring to the central board of film certification (CBFC).
CBFC is a statutory film certification body set up by the ministry of information and broadcasting, which is tasked with regulating the public exhibition of films under the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952.
In another matter related to the same movie, the bench stayed last month’s Allahabad high court order that directed the filmmakers to appear before the high court on July 27 and required the central government to form a committee to give its views on the film. The court further restrained high court from proceeding on a batch of petitions seeking a ban on the movie.
On the public interest litigation filed by Haryana resident Mamta Rani who sought directions to CBFC to withdraw its certificate, the bench underlined that it was not appropriate for the Supreme Court to interfere in these matters under Article 32 of the Constitution which is meant to protect fundamental rights.
“It’s not proper for this court to interfere in such matters, based on each person’s sensitivity, nor are these matters to be generally entertained by the courts,” the bench said in its order.
Adding a word of caution, the top court further recorded: “Courts should not become some kind of appellate authority for such matters when the censor board has already issued the certification.”
Mamta Rani’s petition accused the makers of ‘Adipurush’ of allegedly offending the sentiments of Hindus by depicting Ramayana and its characters in an objectionable manner. Advocate Kumar Ratnesh Shukla argued that the certification has been granted in violation of the guidelines and that cinematographic liberty cannot mean disrespecting the religious sentiments of a community.
But the bench remained unimpressed.
“Some people may be genuinely hurt, some may not. Everybody is now touchy on everything. Should we scrutinise everything here? Tolerance for films, books etc are going down these days,” justice Kaul lamented, as the bench dismissed the petition.
The next matter before the court was an appeal moved by the ‘Adipurush’ makers against the June 28 order of the Allahabad high court, which ordered movie director Om Raut, producer Bhushan Kumar, and dialogue writer Manoj Muntashir to appear before it on July 27.
It further directed the central government to constitute a five-member committee to give its view on the film as to whether it had hurt the feelings of the public, besides reviewing the decision of granting of certificate to the movie.
Senior counsel Harish Salve appeared on behalf of the movie makers in their appeal, contending the CBFC certification has been rendered meaningless by the high court order. He added there is an appellate board to challenge the certification of a movie and that the adjudicatory process cannot be circumvented by filing PILs.
Agreeing with him, the bench stayed the high court order and the proceedings before it.
