http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 68

PETITIONER:

V. C. SHUKLA

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)

DATE OF JUDGMENT11/04/1980

BENCH:

FAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA

BENCH:

FAZALALI, SYED MURTAZA

KAILASAM, P.S.

KOSHAL, A.D.

CITATION:

1980 AIR 1382 1980 SCR (3) 500

1980 SCC (2) 665

CITATOR INFO :

RF 1981 SC 873 (52)

R 1982 SC 839 (25)

RF 1986 SC 791 (5)

R 1988 SC1531 (163)

ACT:

Criminal Conspiracy, ingredients of-Section 120B of the

Indian Penal Code, evidence required to prove criminal

conspiracy explained-Approver’s evidence, value of.

Words and Phrases-"High Public or political Offices"-

Meaning of.

Special Court’s Act 1979, ss. 5, 7, 9 & 11-

Constitutional validity of.

HEADNOTE:

Sri Amrit Nahata PW 1 was a member of Parliament and

had produced a film titled "Kissa Kursi Ka" under the banner

of Dhwani Prakash. The film according to the prosecution was

a grotesque satire containing a scathing criticism of the

functioning of the Central Government and was open to

serious objections which were taken even by the Central

Board of Film Censors. After the film was ready for release,

PW 1, Amrit Nahata, applied for certification of the film on

the 19th of April 1975 before the Board. The film was viewed

on April 24, 1975 by an Examining Committee of the Board and

while three members were of the opinion that certificate for

exhibition, with drastic cuts, should be given, another

member and Mr. N. S. Thapa, Chairman, disagreed with the

opinion of their colleagues and accordingly referred the

matter to the Revising Committee. The Revising Committee

after viewing the film agreed by a majority of 6 :1 for

certification of the film, the dissent having been voiced by

Mr. Thapa, the Chairman and accordingly under Rule 25(ii) of

the Cinematograph (Censorship) Rules, 1958, a reference was

made to the Central Government on 8-5-1975. In this

connection, a letter was addressed to PW 6, Mr. S. M.

Murshed, who was at the relevant period Director in the

Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Incharge of film and

T.V. Projects and was appointed, Joint Secretary on 1st of

May 1975. Before making his comments PW 6 saw the film some

time in the middle of May, 1975. Meanwhile, PW 1, Amrit

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 2 of 68

Nahata, was directed to deposit the positive print of the

film comprising 14 reels of 35 mm with the Film Division

Auditorium, situate at 1, Mahadev Road, New Delhi. In

pursuance of these directions PW 1 deposited the positive

print and an entry thereof (Ext. 17A) was made by the

Librarian-cum-Projectionist of the Auditorium. PW 17, K. P.

Sreedharam, who was a Technical Officer incharge also

inspected the reels and found them in order.

Although Murshed, PW 6, after seeing the film agreed

with the opinion of the Chairman of the Board that the film

may be open to objection on the ground that it was full of

sarcasm and contained criticism of the political functioning

of the Governmental machinery yet he was personally of the

opinion that certification for exhibition should not be

refused. PW 6 accordingly recorded a note and submitted it

to Mr. A. J. Kidwai, the then Secretary, Ministry of

Information and Broadcasting. The matter was then examined

by Mr. I. K. Gujral, the then Minister of Information and

Broadcasting but

501

no final decision was taken. Meanwhile PW 1, Amrit Nahata,

filed a writ petition (Ex. PW 1/D) in the Supreme Court. On

the 23rd of the June 1975, a notice was issued by the

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to PW 1, Amrit

Nahata, to show cause why certification to the film be not

refused. The notice was made returnable by 9-7-75. Thus the

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting had taken a

tentative de