SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DIPAK MISRA, CJI., A.M. KHANWILKAR, D.Y. CHANDRACHUND, JJ.
HARINDER SINGH SIKKA - Appellant
Vs.
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Writ Petitions (Civil) No. 313 of 2018
Decided on : 10-04-2018
Freedom of Expression - Film Certification - The court emphasized that once a film is granted a certificate by the competent statutory board, there should be no obstruction to its exhibition unless the certificate is nullified or modified by a superior authority. The court highlighted the potentiality of hindering freedom of speech and expression if such obstructions are encouraged.
Fact of the Case:
The producer of the film sought relief against attempts to curtail the freedom of expression by preventing the release of the film 'Nanak Shah Fakir' in movie halls, despite certification by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
Finding of the Court:
The court emphasized that once a film is certified by the CBFC and any required modifications are carried out, there should be no obstruction to its exhibition. It directed the respondents to ensure maintenance of law and order wherever the film is released.
Issues: The issue revolved around the curtailment of freedom of expression and the authority of the CBFC in certifying films for public exhibition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that unless a film's certificate is nullified or modified by a superior authority, the producer or distributor has the right to exhibit it in movie halls. It stressed the duty of the state to facilitate the enjoyment of rights sanctioned by law.
Final Decision: The court issued an interim order directing the respondents to ensure maintenance of law and order wherever the film is released, and listed the matter for further hearing.
ORDER :
1. The instant writ petition presents yet another picture of many a private body endeavouring to curtail the freedom of expression of the idea of an author scripted in celluloid language because they have a perception that there will be some kind of law and order situation if the film in question, namely, Nanak Shah Fakir is released in movie halls.
2. It is submitted by Mr. Suri, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner-the producer of the film that when the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has issued the Certificate under the Cinema to graph Act, 1952 with certain modifications to be done by the producer. The Examining Committee, after due examination, has cleared the film and the CBFC has finally certified that the film is fit for unrestricted public exhibition. Hence, there cannot be any kind of impediment in such exhibition. He has drawn our attention to Annexure P2-the certificate in question dated 30.03.2015-and also the certificate dated 30.03.2015 as endorsed on 28.03.2018, Annexure P10 which is the final certificate granted by the CBFC.
3. It is well settled that the CBFC sometimes grants certificates subject to certain excisions and modifications.
4. Once the same are carried out, there cannot be any kind of obstruction for exhibition of a film. That having been done, we do not see how any body, group, association or individual can create any kind of disturbance in exhibition of the film. It is becoming a law unto themselves and not respecting the law that governs the land. Once the film is granted certificate by the competent statutory Board unless the said certificate is nullified or modified by any superior authority, the producer or distributor of the film has every right to get it exhibited in a movie hall. If such activities are encouraged, the same has the potentiality to bring in anarchy and cripple the right of freedom of speech and expression. In any case, such bodies, groups or individuals cannot assume the position as if they are the authorities to grant certificate or unless they feel that the movie is to be released, it should not see the light of the day. The thought, the least said, is unacceptable.
5. Issue notice.
6. As an interim measure, it is directed that all the respondents shall see to it that wherever the film is released, the law and order is maintained and no one shall be allowed to create any kind of disturbance. It is the duty of the State to facilitate the enjoyment of right which has the sanction of law.
7. The petitioner is at liberty to communicate this order by email to all the respondents and authorities concerned so that needful can be done.
8. Let the matter be listed on 08th May 2018.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.