2019 Supreme(SC) 433

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, HEMANT GUPTA, JJ.
INDIBILITY CREATIVE PVT. LTD. & ORS. – PETITIONER
Versus
GOVT OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. - RESPONDENT
Writ Petition (Civil) No 306 of 2019
Decided on : 11-04-2019

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Wielding of extra constitutional authority is destructive of legitimate expectations.
(2) Excess or abuse of statutory power is amenable to constitutional guarantees which protect citizen against arbitrary State action.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India – Article 19 – Ban on screening of feature film by State Government by resorting to extra constitutional means – Bhobishyoter Bhoot is a social and political satire about ghosts who wish to make themselves relevant in future by rescuing the marginalized and obsolete – Film mourns living dead – Bhobishyoter Bhoot has a UA certification for public exhibition, issued by Central Board of Film Certification – Unceremonious pulling out of film received a considerable degree of press coverage in print media – Apprehension of petitioners is that there has been an unlawful interference with public exhibition of film by organized and concerted effort on part of authorities of State – State of West Bengal has not taken recourse to its powers either under West Bengal Cinemas (Regulation) Act 1954 or Cinematograph Act 1952 – Yet, barring a couple of exceptions, all theatre owners and exhibitors pulled film off radar – Commitment to free speech involves protecting speech that is palatable as well as speech that we do not want to hear – Protection of freedom of speech is founded on the belief that speech is worth defending even when certain individuals may not agree with or even despise what is being spoken – At the heart of democracy, a basic human right, and its protection is a mark of a civilized and tolerant society – However, like all forms of speech and expression, satirical expression maybe restricted in accordance with restrictions envisaged under Article 19(2) of Constitution. (Paras 3, 4, 6, 12 and 13)

       (B) Cinematograph Act 1952 – Sections 4, 5, 5A and 5B – Constitution of India – Article 19 – Ban on screening of feature film (Bhobishyoter Bhoot) by State Government by resorting to extra constitutional means – Police are not in a free society the self-appointed guardians of public morality – Uniformed authority of their force is subject to rule of law – They cannot arrogate to themselves authority to be willing allies in suppression of dissent and obstruction of speech and expression – If there was any doubt whatever over entitlement of producers to have film exhibited, it was laid to rest when producers immediately informed Joint Commissioner of film being CBFC certified – Excess or abuse of statutory power is amenable to constitutional guarantees which protect citizen against arbitrary State action – Danger which this case exemplifies is peril of subjecting freedom of speech and expression of citizen to actions which are not contemplated by statute and lie beyond lawful exercise of public power – All exercises of authority in pursuance of enabling statutory provisions are amenable to statutory remedies and are subject to judicial oversight under a regime of constitutional remedies – Those who disagree have a simple expedient of not watching a film – Constitution does not permit those in authority who disagree to crush freedom of others to believe, think and express – Wielding of extra constitutional authority is destructive of legitimate expectations – Under constitutional scheme, restrictions can only be imposed by or under a law which is made by State – State of West Bengal had not taken recourse to its statutory powers either under state or union legislation – There has been an unconstitutional attempt to invade fundamental rights of producers, actors and audience – Mandamus issued restraining State from taking recourse to any form of extra constitutional means to prevent lawful screening of feature film Bhobishyoter Bhoot – Respondents to pay to petitioners compensation of Rs. 20 lakhs – Petitioners shall be entitled to costs of proceedings quantified at Rs 1 lakh. (Paras 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21)

       (C) Words and Phrases – Satire – Satire is a literary genre where topical issues are held up to scorn by means of ridicule or irony – It is one of the most effective art forms revealing absurdities, hypocrisies and contradictions in so much of life – It has unique ability to quickly and clearly make a point and facilitate understanding in ways that other forms of communication and expression often do not. (Para 13)

       Facts of Case:

       Prohibition of exhibition of feature film by Government of West Bengal. Legitimate grievance before Court is that absent a recourse to exercise of statutory power, State and its agencies have resorted to extra constitutional means to abrogate fundamental rights of producer, director and viewers.

       Findings of Court:

       There has been unconstitutional attempt to invade fundamental rights of producers, actors

       and audience. Worse still, by making an example out of them, there has been an attempt to silence criticism and critique. Others who embark upon a similar venture would be subject to chilling effect of similar misadventures. This cannot be countenanced in a free society. Freedom is not a supplicant to power.

       Result : Writ Petition allowed.