On July 21, the Supreme Court of India stayed all proceedings in High Courts against the makers of the movie ‘Adipurush.’ The court’s Division Bench, comprising Justices SK Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, was hearing the makers’ plea challenging the Allahabad High Court’s order seeking the personal appearance of the producer, director and dialogue writer. The court further issued a notice in a separate transfer petition seeking the transfer of all proceedings to the Supreme Court from various High Courts related to the movie.
Notably, the Supreme Court, in another hearing, dismissed a PIL seeking a ban on the ‘Adipurush’ movie for hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus today, July 21. The court’s Division Bench, comprising Justice SK Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia, said that it would be inappropriate for the court to interfere with film certifications based on the “sensitivities of each individual.”
“Why should we entertain this under 32? The cinematography act provides for the method to get certificate. Everybody now is touchy about everything. Every time they will come before the Supreme Court for it. Is everything to be scrutinised by us? The level of tolerance for films, books, paintings keeps on getting down. Now people are hurt maybe sometimes genuinely, maybe sometimes not. But we will not under Article 32 start entertaining them,” Justice SK Kaul orally remarked.
The petitioner argued that the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) did not adhere to the guidelines while granting the certification. However, the court continued to be reluctant to entertain the PIL. The court, while dismissing the PIL, said that the cinematographic representation may not be an exact replica of the religious texts.
“We may say this at the inception itself that cinematographic representations may not be the exact replica of text. There has to be a certain play. However, so that the play does not go beyond a certain limit, a body has been constituted to look into these aspects. In the present case, the certificate was issued by that body and there has been certain modifications made after that too,” the court said.
“It is not appropriate that for each persons’ sensitivities, this court should interfere, especially in exercise of Article 32 of the Constitution of India. We are not inclined to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution of India nor these matters should be generally entertained by courts as the certificate of the censor board is granted. The court should not become some kind of an appellate authority for the censor board,” the court said.
Allahabad High Court Raps Adipurush Makers
On June 28, the Allahabad High Court rapped the makers of the movie ‘Adipurush,’ for hurting the emotions of the public at large by depicting Bhagwan Ram, Mata Sita, Hanuman Ji and other characters from Ramayana in a ‘shameful and disgusting manner’ and as if they are ‘fictional persons’ or ‘comic characters.’
The Allahabad High Court’s Division Bench, comprising Justices Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Shree Prakash Singh, directed the Government of India to constitute a committee to ‘revisit’ the certificate issued to the movie. Furthermore, the court directed ‘Adipurush’ director Om Raut and dialogue writer Manoj Muntashir Shukla to appear before the court in person on the next date, while listing the case for the next hearing on July 27, 2023.
“If we will shut our mouths today then you know what will happen? These incidents are increasing day by day. I saw a movie wherein Lord Shankar was shown running with his Trishul in a very funny manner. Now, these things will be showcased?… The filmmakers earn money as films do business…This is going back to back. Something or the other is being done to break the harmony. The producer will have to come in this. Is this a joke? Suppose if you make even a short documentary on the Quran, depicting wrong things, then you will see what will happen…However, I may once again clarify that it is not about any one religion. It is by chance that this issue is concerned with Ramayana, otherwise, Court belongs to all religions,” the Allahabad High Court orally remarked.
The Allahabad High Court said that the makers, including dialogue writers, have based the characters on various deities from the epic “without taking care of holiness and sanctity of those characters.” The court further remarked that the dialogues are the movie are substandard and contain “cheap language,” and that the scenes depicting Mata Sita are “disgraceful to her very character.”
The Allahabad High Court further said that certain scenes depicting Vibhishana’s wife are “prima-facie obscene” which was absolutely “unwarranted and uncalled for.” The court said that the depiction of Ravan and his Lanka was “ridiculous and cheap.” The court made the aforementioned observations while holding that the PILs filed before it is genuine and within the four corners of the law, as per the rules of the court and the dictums of the Supreme Court.
“Further, it is trite law that in the name of freedom of speech and expression no one can be permitted to do anything which is against the decency or morality or against the public order etc. To us, this film, prima- facie, does not qualify the test as prescribed under Article 19 of the Constitution of India,” the Allahabad High Court said in its 12-page order.
The Allahabad High Court criticised the makers and the dialogue writers for not taking care of the feelings of the public at large, depicting the characters in a “shameful and vulgar manner,” knowing well that the various deities are worshipped by a large number of persons of the society. The court also criticised the Censor Board for not discharging its legal duty while issuing a certificate to release the movie without following the guidelines.
The Allahabad High Court also criticised the Government of India’s inaction after the release of the movie, stating that despite having proper mechanisms to suspend or revoke the certificate or to stop the exhibition of the movie.
“It is not fair to ignore the voice of those people who despite being offended seriously after the release of this film but have been maintaining the public order and are following the law and order. Notably, this is not a single film of this type but as per contentions of learned counsel for the petitioners some more films have been produced earlier showing the Hindu Gods /Godess/Icons in a shameful and disguising manner,” said the Allahabad High Court.
The Allahabad High Court observed that if the “illegal and immoral acts” of the filmmakers are not checked at the earliest, then more movies would be produced touching sensitive aspects of other religions besides Hinduism. Therefore, the Competent Authority under the Government of India must take some “stringent and deterrent action” in the interest of the public at large.
The Allahabad High Court said that the Competent Authority should revisit the issue, invoking its powers u/s 6 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952. The court directed that the Government of India should constitute a committee of not less than five experts “well versed with Valmiki Ramayana,” which was claimed to be the main source for the movie, to examine whether the depiction of various deities and characters in the movie are in conformity with Valmiki Ramayana. The court said that the experts must also be well-versed in Tulsikriti Ramcharit Manas and other religious epics.
The committee would also examine whether the picturisation of Mata Sita and Vibhishana’s wife is in conformity with the guidelines, which mandates the Censor Board to ensure no scenes degrading or denigrating female characters, as the coloured photographs enclosed with the petition, indicates that their depiction is prima facie degrading the sanctity of those characters. The court remarked, “Some scenes relating to the wife of Vibhishana in the film are appearing as obscene.”
The Allahabad High Court directed that the committee be constituted within a week of the order and that the committee provide its report, based on the court’s directions, within a further period of 15 days. The committee’s report must be filed before the court along with the personal affidavit of the Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, the court directed.
The Allahabad High Court further asked the Chairman of the Board of Film Certification, to file his personal affidavit apprising the court as to whether the guidelines for certification of films for the public exhibition have been followed in its letter and spirit while issuing a certificate to the film ‘Adipurush.’
Comments