Emergency is about the Emergency period imposed by Indira Gandhi’s government in 1975. It encountered issues after the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, a leading Sikh organization, claimed the film inaccurately represents Sikhs and called for a ban. Ranaut later stated that the CBFC had suspended the certificate for her film.
![[Setback For Kangana Ranaut] ‘Emergency’ to Miss Sept 6 Release: HC Refuses to Direct CBFC to Issue Censor Certificate Immediately](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/image-14-1.png?resize=400%2C225&ssl=1)
Bombay: Today(4th Sept): Kangana Ranaut’s film Emergency is facing significant controversy after Sikh organizations challenged its release, and the Bombay High Court has ruled against providing relief. The court stated it cannot compel the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to issue a certificate for the film, as this would conflict with an order from the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The film, co-produced by Ranaut’s Manikarnika Films and Zee Studios, was initially set for release on September 6. However, Zee Entertainment Enterprises sought the Bombay High Court’s intervention to direct the CBFC to issue the necessary certificate. The court’s refusal suggests that the film’s release is now uncertain.
Emergency is about the Emergency period imposed by Indira Gandhi’s government in 1975. It encountered issues after the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, a leading Sikh organization, claimed the film inaccurately represents Sikhs and called for a ban. Ranaut later stated that the CBFC had suspended the certificate for her film.
In response to a Public Interest Litigation filed by two Sikh organizations in the Madhya Pradesh High Court, the Censor Board informed the court that the film had not yet received a certificate. The court subsequently dismissed the petition.
A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf asked the authorities for clarification on whether the film had received certification from the CBFC. The Court’s inquiry comes amid concerns that the film may contain scenes that could hurt the sentiments of certain communities.
Meanwhile, the Centre had already responded to a similar PIL in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, where concerns were raised about the movie targeting the Sikh community.
The Centre informed the Court that “certification of the film had not yet taken place” and assured that all necessary precautions, including those mandated by the Cinematograph Act, would be taken to ensure that the content does not hurt the sentiments of any community.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, while taking note of the Centre’s assurance, observed that even after certification, aggrieved parties have the right to approach the CBFC for a review of the film by a Revising Committee.
The petitioners before the Madhya Pradesh High Court were represented by Advocates Narinder Pal Singh Ruprah and Navtej Singh Ruprah. Advocate Sandeep Shukla appeared on behalf of the Union government, while Additional Advocate General Amit Seth represented the State of Madhya Pradesh.
In the parallel case in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the petitioners were represented by Advocates Deepinder Singh Virk, Imaan Singh Khara, KS Sidhu, GS Salana, and JS Salana. The Union government was represented by Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain and Senior Panel Counsel Dheeraj Jain, with Additional Advocate General Saurav Khurana representing the State of Punjab.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
