From Kissa Kursi ka to Padmavati, this is not first demand to Ban a film.

This Article I have taken from Times of India Being Written By Mr. Dhananjay Mahapatra. I always like his writings as he provide a depth and an unbiased angle to each of his story .

For Mass Comm students this Article can beneficial in terms of Press  laws and Indian Cinema .

Historically, a tolerant India witnessed seamless confluence of ideas, values, cultures and religions. Today, the intelligentsia believes that growing intolerance has impeded civilisational growth by endangering free speech. Repeated featuring of films in Supreme Court judgmentswould tell us a very different story — a story of continuous intolerance towards films.

From government to fringe elements, we have never been tolerant or respected right to free speech when it came to films portraying the personal lives of famous and notorious personalities.

Rewind to the 1960s. K A Abbas had moved the SC to challenge the Centre's demand for cuts in his film 'A Tale of Four Cities' highlighting the chasm in the lives of the rich and the poor in four metropolises, which included the life of those operating in red light areas, for a 'U' certificate.

The SC's judgment [1970 (2) SCC 780] reflects the 1960s mindset. It upheld censorship and said, "Motion pictures must be regarded differently from other forms of speech and expression. A person reading a book or other writing or hearing a speech or viewing a painting or sculpture is not as deeply stirred as by seeing a motion picture. Therefore, treatment of the latter on a different footing is also a valid classification."

In 1975, Amrit Nahata's film 'Kissa Kursi Ka' boldly portrayed the political doings of Indira Gandhi and her petulant political heir, Sanjay Gandhi. CBFC refused certification. Nahata moved the SC. The SC judges wanted to see the film before deciding the petition. What Karni Sena is threatening to do with 'Padmavati' now was done by Sanjay Gandhi and then I&B minister VC Shukla in 1975. All prints of the film were brought to Delhi from Bombay, taken to the Maruti factory in Gurgaon and burnt. The SC was told the film prints were misplaced and could not be shown to the judges. This brazenness shocked the SC but it could send Sanjay Gandhi to jail for a month only after Indira Gandhi was defeated in the elections.

The famous Raj Kapoor too was not spared. He faced prosecution for 'Satyam Shivam Sundaram' along with the producer, actors and others connected to the movie as a complaint accused them of projecting sexuality, moral depravity and eroding public decency. The SC quashed the prosecution [1980 (1) SCC 43] and gave a thumbs up to artistic freedom of expression.

Tamil film 'Ore Oru Gramathile' became the centre of controversy for showcasing politicisation of reservation for backward classes and the flip side of it — upper caste youth obtaining false caste certificates to get employment. It was denied certification by the CBFC. Dealing with this film, the SC in S Rangarajan vs P Jagjivan Ram [1989(2) SCC 574] appeared to have come of age and ruled, "The standard to be applied by the (censor) board or courts for judging a film should be that of an ordinary man of common sense and prudence and not that of an out of the ordinary or hypersensitive man.

"We, however, wish to add a word more. The censor board should exercise considerable circumspection on movies affecting the morality or decency of our people and cultural heritage of the country. Moral values in particular, should not be allowed to be sacrificed in the guise of social change or cultural assimilation... We do not, however, mean that the censors should have an orthodox or conservative outlook. Far from it, they must be responsive to social change and they must go with the current climate. All we wish to state is that the censors may display more sensitivity to movies which will have a markedly deleterious effect to lower the moral standards of those who see it." In between, there were numerous films, including 'Bandit Queen', 'Kuttrapathirikai' (on Rajiv Gandhi assassination), 'Santhana Kadu' (on Veerappan), 'BlackFriday' and 'Udta Punjab', which faced their share of controversy, some engineered and some spontaneous.

Many films were based on lifestoriesof famous and notorious personalities. For such autobiographical films, the SC and HCs had put a caveat — they can be based on information available in public records and field information but cannot depict private lives as it would violate right to privacy of those personalities or their relatives.

Buton November 16, the SC while refusing to interfere with the release of 'An Insignificant Man', based on Arvind Kejriwal's life, struck a nail on the head of intolerance towards artistic freedom of expression. "An artist has his own freedom to express himself in a manner which is not prohibited in law and such prohibitions are not read by implication to crucify the rights of expressive mind. Human history records that there are many authors who express their thoughts according to the choice of their words, phrases, expressions and also create characters who may look absolutely different than an ordinary man would conceive of. A thought provoking film should never mean that it has to be didactic or in any way puritanical. It can be expressive and provoking the conscious or the sub-conscious thoughts of the viewer. If there has to be any limitation, that has to be as per the prescription in law," CJI Dipak Misra said while dictating the order in open court.

The three-judge bench said, "The courts are to be extremely slow to pass any kind of restraint order in such a situation and should allow the respect that a creative man enjoys in writing a drama, a play, a play let, a book on philosophy, or any kind of thought that is expressed on celluloid or theatre etc."

Courtesy: Times Of India./Date: 20.11.2017.