The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a petition that sought to challenge the certificate granted by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to the film ‘Taj Story’, starring Paresh Rawal. The court stated that it cannot function as a “super censor board.
dquo;
The movie, produced by CA Suresh Jha, is slated for release on Friday and has been embroiled in controversy since its poster was released, depicting a statue of Lord Shiva emerging from the Taj Mahal’s dome.
A bench led by Chief Justice DK Upadhyay and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela pointed out that the Cinematograph Act does not include any provisions for the CBFC to review its own certifications.
“There is no provision for review (of the certificate granted by the censor board) in the Cinematograph Act; we can’t issue such a direction. You haven’t done any research… no case laws, nothing. Just because you think something is not right, you will file it? We’re not a super censor board… try to understand our limitations,” the bench remarked.
The court further added, “We cannot interfere like this. Please understand. You should have drawn our attention as to how the certification given is in violation of the principles laid down in the Cinematograph Act.”
The court advised the petitioners, Shakeel Abbas and Chetna Gautam, that they should have approached the Central government to challenge the certificate, rather than filing a writ petition directly in court.
Section 6 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, grants the Central government the authority to declare a film uncertified or to issue interim measures, such as suspending a certificate, upon receiving an application from an aggrieved party.
Acknowledging the court’s guidance, the petitioners withdrew their petitions with the liberty to approach the Central government. The court noted, “Section 6 provides a revisional remedy to a person aggrieved by film certification, and it would be more appropriate for the petitioners to approach the Central government by invoking the remedy under Section 6. Counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the writ petitions with liberty to invoke the remedy under Section 6. Petitions are thus dismissed as not pressed with liberty as prayed.”
In their petition, Abbas had requested that the film’s release be stayed, or that the CBFC be directed to review the certificate or impose necessary cuts to maintain communal harmony. Additionally, they sought a disclaimer for the movie, indicating that it presents a contested historical narrative.
The petition argued that the film is based on fabricated facts and serves a propaganda purpose, aiming to spread misinformation about the Taj Mahal. It further stated that releasing the film without cuts could undermine historical scholarship, incite communal unrest, and damage the international reputation of the Taj Mahal, a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
“The movie contains deeply divisive scenes that could provoke communal tensions and disturb peace in society. The film has amplified controversial statements made from time to time by BJP leaders and other Hindutva organizations, which may spark communal unrest nationwide amid growing concerns regarding the potentially inflammatory and divisive content of the movie, which may raise apprehensions of inciting communal disharmony,” the petition alleged.