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.
