Hiten Dhirajlal Mehta vs Bhansali Production

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Bom) 213

DIPANKAR DATTA, M.S.KARNIK
Hiten Dhirajlal Mehta – Appellant
Versus
Bhansali Production – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashok Saraogi a/w Mr. Anand Mishra, Ms. Radhika Chamaria i/by Kruti Bhavsar, Ms. Dhruti M. Kapadia, Mr. Y.C. Naidu a/w Mr. Sarosh Damania, Mr. Nishank Barolia, Chaitravi Pai, Mr. Amol Surve and Afrin Shaikh.
For the Respondents:Mr. Ravi Kadam, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Parag Khandhar and Ms. Prachi Garg i/by DSK Legal, Mr. Ravi Kadam, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Ameet Naik, Madhu Gadodia, Mr. Deepak Deshmukh i/by Naik Naik & Co., Mr. Anil C. Singh, Addl. Solicitor General a/w Mr. Advait M. Sethna, Mr. Aditya Thakker, Ms. Anusha Amin, Mr. Pranav Thackur, Mr. Tanay Mandot, Mr. Rangan Majumdar and Mr. Sandeep Raman, Ms. Uma Palsuledesai, AGP.

JUDGMENT :

Dipankar Datta, J.

1. By this common judgment and order, we propose to decide Public Interest Litigation (L) No. 4336 of 2022 and Public Interest Litigation (L) No. 5227 of 2022 together with Writ Petition (L) No. 5235 of 2022.

2. Writ Petition (L) No. 5235 of 2022 has been placed before us in terms of an order dated 23rd February, 2022 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court. Their Lordships having been informed of pendency of Public Interest Litigation (L) Nos. 4336 and 5227 of 2022 desired that the writ petition be placed before this Bench for analogous hearing.

3. The grievance raised in the public interest litigations and the writ petition has its genesis in certification of a film titled “Gangubai Kathiawadi” (hereafter “the film”) by the Board of Film Certification (hereafter “the Board”) constituted by the Central Government under section 3 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (hereafter “the Act”) for public exhibition. The attempt of the petitioners is not to stall release of the film on the date scheduled, i.e. 25th February, 2022, but to tinker with the freedom of expression of those behind production of the film on the specious ground that a particular dialogue, th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(Bom) 213

DIPANKAR DATTA, M.S.KARNIKHiten Dhirajlal Mehta – AppellantVersusBhansali Production – Respondent

Cases Referred (4)

DIPANKAR DATTA, M.S.KARNIK
Hiten Dhirajlal Mehta – Appellant
Versus
Bhansali Production – Respondent