The Bombay High Court today asked the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to take a call on actor-MP Kangana Ranaut’s movie Emergency by Wednesday. The high court was hearing a petition by the movie’s co-producer Zee Entertainment Enterprises, seeking the release of the censor certificate so that the movie can hit the screens.
The movie, which stars Kangana Ranaut, Anupam Kher and Shreyas Talpade, is based on the Emergency imposed by the Indira Gandhi government in 1975. It has run into trouble after Sikh organisations alleged that it misrepresents and community. Sources in the central government have said there is “some sensitive content” in the movie.
Abhinav Chandrachud, the film censor’s counsel, told the court that the CBFC’s decision was based on representations objecting to the movie’s release. He submitted that some scenes show a polarising figure cutting a deal with political parties. “We have to see whether this is factually accurate,” he told the division bench of Justice BP Colabawalla and Justice Firdosh Pooniwalla.
Justice Colabawalla said ‘Emergency’ is a movie and not a documentary. “Do you think that the public is so naive that they will believe everything that they see in a movie? What about about creative freedom? It’s not for CBFC to decide whether this affects public order,” he said.
The CBFC said it must send the matter to a revising committee and asked for two weeks to decide the matter, but the court refused. “There was enough time given to decide on either giving a certificate or rejecting it, but you only passed the buck that the review committee will decide or the revision committee will decide. Now you take a decision by Monday on (whether) you want to release or not,” the court said.
The high court said the trend of objecting to the release of films needs to stop. “What about creative freedom and the freedom of speech and expression in our country?”
At one point, Zee counsel Venkatesh Dhond said CBFC was biding time with an eye on Haryana elections. The Censor responded that the “state in question is Punjab, not Haryana”.
When the court asked what is the political angle in the case, Mr Chandrachud said there was none. But Mr Dhond responded, “It will be seen as a BJP MP (Kangana) offending a community. The political apprehension is that the Sikh community will feel this film is anti- Sikh. CBFC is the executive and people won’t vote for those who approved the release of the film which is anti-Sikh.”
