Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Nipun Malhotra, is the founder of an organization promoting disability awareness and is a person with arthrogryposis. He filed a writ petition under Article 226 before the Delhi High Court, aggrieved by the portrayal of persons with disabilities in the film 'Aankh Micholi' produced by Sony Pictures. The film, which received a 'U' certification from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), was released on 3 November 2023. The appellant had previously sent a legal notice to Sony Pictures on 6 October 2023, raising objections to the trailer, to which Sony Pictures replied on 17 October 2023. The appellant claimed that the film violates the constitutional rights of persons with disabilities, the Cinematograph Act, 1952, and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (RPwD Act). He sought directions for the inclusion of a disability expert in the CBFC and its advisory panel, as well as relief against Sony Pictures including punitive damages. The High Court dismissed the petition on grounds of maintainability without examining the merits. The Supreme Court granted leave and allowed the appeal, holding that the High Court should have considered the petition on its merits. The Court emphasized that the portrayal of persons with disabilities in media must avoid stereotypes and disabling imagery, and that the CBFC must ensure compliance with guidelines protecting marginalized groups. The case was remanded to the High Court for a fresh hearing on merits.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Article 226 of the Constitution - The High Court dismissed the petition on grounds of maintainability without examining the merits. The Supreme Court held that the High Court should have considered the petition on merits, as the petition raised substantial questions regarding the rights of persons with disabilities and the certification of films. (Paras 1-3) B) Disability Rights - Stereotypical Portrayal - Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, Sections 3, 5, 12 - The appellant contended that the film 'Aankh Micholi' perpetuates harmful stereotypes against persons with disabilities, violating their dignity and right to non-discrimination. The Supreme Court noted the importance of avoiding disabling imagery and stereotyping in media. (Paras 4-6) C) Cinematograph Act - Certification Guidelines - Cinematograph Act, 1952, Sections 3, 5, 7 - The appellant sought inclusion of a disability expert in the Central Board of Film Certification. The Supreme Court observed that the CBFC must ensure compliance with guidelines that prevent derogatory portrayal of marginalized groups. (Paras 5-6) D) Freedom of Speech - Limits on Speech - Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution - The Court discussed that while freedom of speech is fundamental, it must not prejudice or further disenfranchise marginalized communities. Speech that perpetuates stereotypes against persons with disabilities can be restricted. (Paras 14-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the writ petition as not maintainable, and whether the portrayal of persons with disabilities in the film 'Aankh Micholi' violates the constitutional and statutory rights of persons with disabilities.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and remanded the matter to the High Court for a fresh hearing on merits. The Court held that the High Court should not have dismissed the petition on maintainability grounds without considering the substantial questions raised.
Law Points
- Maintainability of writ petition under Article 226
- Stereotypical portrayal of persons with disabilities
- Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act 2016
- Cinematograph Act 1952
- Freedom of speech under Article 19(1)(a)
- Disability humour vs disabling humour
