Bombay HC Refuses To Direct CBFC To Release Certificate For Film ‘EMERGENCY’; Says Can’t Ignore MP High Court’s Order
|The Bombay High Court has refused to direct Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to release the certificate for the Bollywood film ‘EMERGENCY’ starring actress Kangana Ranaut.
The Court was dealing with a writ petition filed by Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. seeking a writ of mandamus to the CBFC to communicate, produce, and provide a copy of Certificate already issued on August 29, 2024 in favour of the said film in the prescribed format.
A Division Bench comprising Justice B.P. Colabawalla and Justice Firdosh P. Pooniwalla said, “Normally, the matter would have rested here. However, we cannot ignore the order of the Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court passed on 3rd September 2024. Before the Madhya Pradesh High Court, it was the submission of Union of India that the film “EMERGENCY” is not yet certified and is under examination in terms of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Rules framed thereunder, and in case any further representation is received from any organization/body/individual, the same shall be considered while considering the certification of the film.”
The Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court, Jabalpur had permitted the petitioners before it to file a comprehensive representation to the CBFC with regard to their objections to the Certification of the film within a period of three days from September 3, 2024, and on receipt of such representation, the CBFC was to consider the objections in an expeditious manner before certifying the film.
Senior Advocate Venktesh Dhond appeared for the petitioner while Advocate Abhinav Chandrachud appeared for the respondents.
Factual Background -
After the film ‘Emergency’ was produced on July 8, 2024, an application was submitted on the e-cinepramaan portal to CBFC for certification of the same for public exhibition. On August 1, CBFC informed the co-producer of the film that screening of the film is scheduled on August 1. On August 8, CBFC issued a communication stating that the said film is suitable for Unrestricted Public Exhibition with an endorsement of caution, provided certain excisions and modifications listed in the Annexure to the said communication are carried out. In other words, the certification granted to the film was ‘UA’ subject to the excisions and modifications being carried out as more particularly set out in the Annexure to the said communication.
On August 14, the co-producers submitted their film with the necessary modifications and cuts as required by CBFC. Thereafter, an email was received from CBFC stating that the Certificate for the film has been generated successfully. Despite this, when the co-producers went to the CBFC’s office for collecting the signed certificate, the same was refused to be handed over. This was on the basis that certain groups of Sikh Community found the trailer of the film objectionable, and therefore, opposed the film release. Since the said certificate was not handed over by the CBFC, on September 2, a legal notice was sent to the CBFC for handing over the same, and to which there was no response. Hence, the petition was preferred before the High Court.
The High Court in the above context of the case observed, “We are unable to persuade ourselves that until the Chairperson signs the Certificate it is not issued. If we were to accept the argument of Dr. Chandrachud, it would mean that the Chairperson can refuse to grant the Certificate even though the makers of a film have complied with all the requisitions of the CBFC and the CBFC has informed the makers that everything is on order, and they can collect the Certificate from the office of the CBFC. At least prima facie, we do not think that the Chairperson has such unbridled powers.”
The Court said that though there may be some substance in the argument canvassed by the counsel for the petitioner, it cannot pass a direction in light of the fact that the Madhya Pradesh High Court has specifically directed the CBFC to consider the objections filed before it by the Jabalpur Sikh Sangat and others, before certifying the film.
“If we were to direct the CBFC to release the Certificate without considering those objections, we would effectively be directing the CBFC to breach an order passed by the Division Bench of another High Court. Judicial propriety demands that such a course should always be avoided. Considering these circumstances, we are of the view that at this stage, we are unable to direct the CBFC to release the Certificate as sought for by the Petitioner in the present Petition”, it added.
The Court did not dispose of the petition and directed CBFC to consider the objections, if any, filed by Jabalpur Sikh Sangat or any other person, as expeditiously as possible and thereafter take a decision on whether to release the certificate for the film.
“This entire exercise shall be done on or before 18th September 2024. We must add that we have laid down this timeline because the Jabalpur Sikh Sangat and others are directed to file their comprehensive representation on or before 6th September, 2024 [as per the order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court Order dated 3rd September 2024]. We must also clarify that these directions are passed without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Petitioner in the above Writ Petition”, it further ordered.
Accordingly, the High Court listed the case for further consideration on September 19, 2024.
Cause Title- Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. v. Central Board of Film Certification & Anr.
Appearance:
Petitioner: Senior Advocate Venktesh Dhond, Advocates Tanvi Sinha, Navankur Pathak, and Akshat Agrawal.
Respondents: Advocates Abhinav Chandrachud, Janay Jain, Manisha Mane Bhande, Akshay Arora, Shreya Jha, and Mohsin Ghariwala.