Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a film producer/director, produced a Hindi feature film titled 'Wounded' based on the life of a woman dacoit, Seema Parihar, who herself acted in the film. The film depicts how a simple village girl is forced into dacoity after abduction due to poverty. The petitioner submitted the film to the Central Board of Film Certification (respondent 2) for a certificate under Section 5-A of the Cinematograph Act, 1952. The Board, after viewing by the Examining Committee, passed an order on 31/1/2005 granting an 'A' certificate (restricted to adults) subject to certain cuts and modifications, including deletion of scenes showing the protagonist brandishing a gun and other violent acts. The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, arguing that the cuts were arbitrary, unreasonable, and violated his fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a). The respondents defended the cuts, stating they were necessary to prevent glorification of violence and to maintain public order and morality. The court examined the guidelines under the Cinematograph Act, particularly paragraph 2(x) which prohibits glorification of violence and use of weapons. The court held that the Board's decision was reasonable and not arbitrary, as the film's depiction of a dacoit brandishing a gun could promote violence and affect public order. The court noted that the Board had considered the film as a whole and had not banned it, but only imposed reasonable restrictions. The court dismissed the petition, upholding the Board's order with the cuts. The judgment emphasized that while artistic expression is protected, it is subject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order, decency, and morality.
Headnote
A) Cinematograph Act - Certification of Films - Section 5-A, Section 4, Section 5-B - Guidelines for Certification of Films - The petitioner challenged the Board's order granting 'A' certificate with cuts. The court examined whether the cuts were justified under the guidelines and the Act. Held that the Board's decision was reasonable and not arbitrary, as the film glorified violence and showed weapons, which could affect public order and morality. (Paras 1-20) B) Constitutional Law - Freedom of Speech and Expression - Article 19(1)(a) - Reasonable Restrictions - Article 19(2) - The court considered the balance between artistic expression and the need to prevent glorification of crime and violence. Held that the restrictions imposed by the Board were reasonable and in the interest of public order and decency. (Paras 15-25) C) Cinematograph Act - Guidelines for Certification of Films - Paragraph 2(x) - Scenes showing use of weapons - The Board directed deletion of scenes where the protagonist brandishes a gun. The court upheld this, noting that such scenes could promote violence. Held that the guidelines permit such cuts to prevent glorification of criminal acts. (Paras 10-18)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Central Board of Film Certification's decision to grant an 'A' certificate subject to certain cuts and modifications to the film 'Wounded' is arbitrary, unreasonable, or violative of the petitioner's fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The Board's order granting 'A' certificate with cuts is upheld.
Law Points
- Cinematograph Act
- 1952
- Section 5-A
- Section 4
- Section 5-B
- Guidelines for Certification of Films
- Freedom of speech and expression
- Article 19(1)(a)
- Article 19(2)
- Reasonable restrictions
- Public order
- Decency or morality
- Glorification of violence
- Certification of films
- Adult certification
- Examining Committee
- Revising Committee
- Cuts and modifications
