Back
2020 Supreme(Online)(KER) 13619
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANU SIVARAMAN, J
AHALIA INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION – Appellant
Versus
MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BORADCASTING – Respondent
WP(C)/730/2020
SRI.K.B.GANGESH, SMT.SMITHA CHATHANARAMBATH, SMT.ATHIRA A.MENON, SRI.AMAL S KUMAR, SRI.AJMAL AHMED R. , SRI.ANISH JAIN, SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW, SRI.ARUN THOMAS, SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN, SRI.VIJAY V. PAUL, SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA, SMT.VEENA RAVEENDRAN, SRI.ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL, SMT.DIVYA SARA GEORGE
A film can be certified after the removal of defamatory content, addressing the obligations of film distributors regarding amended versions.
Headnote:
Defamation - Film Certification - Relevant Acts and Sections - The court addressed the certification and exhibition of films, highlighting legal provisions relating to defamation and film censorship. The amendment to remove defamatory content influenced the court's decision to close the writ petition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the certification of the film 'Driving Licence,' alleging it contained defamatory content against a hospital. The petitioner sought to quash the certificate and remove the offending dialogues.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that corrections had been made to the film's content and that only the amended version would be exhibited henceforth, effectively addressing the petitioner's concerns about defamation.
Issues: Whether the film 'Driving Licence' can be certified for screening despite containing allegedly defamatory dialogues, and the obligation of respondents to ensure only the corrected version is shown.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that, as the necessary corrections had been made and confirmed by the Respondents, there was no longer any basis for the petition challenging the film's certification.
Final Decision: Writ petition closed as the corrected version of the film will be exhibited.
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:
“(i) a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction to quash Certificate No.VIS/1/43/2019/THI dated 02.12.2019 issued by the 2nd respondent to Malayalam film Driving Licence for public exhibition as evidenced by Ext P1 in so far as it permits screening of defamatory dialogues against Ahalia Hospital;
(ii) a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the respondents 1 to 3 to direct the 4th respondent to remove defamatory dialogues against Ahalia Hospital from the film Driving Licence forthwith and on failure to uncertify the film;
(iii) a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding respondents 1 to 3 to consider Exts P2 and P3 complaints preferred by the petitioner and to uncertify the film Driving Licence to the extend it screens defamatory dialogues against Ahalia Hospital forthwith;”
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for respondents 1 to 3 as well as the learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent.
3. It is submitted by the Learned Assistant Solicitor General of India as well as the learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent that appropriate corrections have been made and the word 'Ahalia' used in the conversation in the film in question has been changed and the certificate has been obtained from the 2nd respondent for the amended copy of the movie. It is submitted that necessary changes have been effected and only the copy of the movie as amended and certified by the 2nd respondent is being exhibited by the respondents. The learned counsel undertakes that only the version with the corrections as carried out will be exhibited by the 4th respondent.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents are duty bound to ensure that only the corrected version is exhibited henceforth in any version including the telecast version of the movie.
It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent that since corrections have been effected, only the corrected version will be exhibited henceforth in any manner. The said submission is recorded and the writ petition is accordingly closed.
Sd/-
ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DETAILS OF THE FILM DRIVING LICENCE AS PUBLISHED IN THE WEBSITE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH COPY OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
30.12.2019 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 30.12.2019 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF OF LAWYER NOTICE DATED
03.01.2020 ISSUED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL
