The Delhi High Court refused to stop the release of “The Taj Story”, criticizing the poorly prepared PIL and noting that artistic expression cannot be curtailed. The Bench said the petitioner may approach the Centre under Section 6 of the Cinematograph Act.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought to stop the release of the film “The Taj Story”, which is scheduled to be released in theatres tomorrow.
The petition had claimed that the movie contains “unverified claims” about the Taj Mahal and could “potentially incite communal disharmony.”
The case was heard by a Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela. The matter was listed for hearing post-lunch.
Earlier in the day, when the case was called out, the Chief Justice observed that the
“urgency seems to exist only at the time of mentioning, not afterwards,”
as the petitioner’s counsel was absent at that time. The matter was then “passed over” and later taken up again once the counsel appeared.
During the hearing, the Court asked the petitioner’s lawyer to
“come to your prayers directly. You’re seeking a review of the censor board’s certification—is there any legal provision allowing that?”
To this, the counsel replied,
“I’m not aware, will have to check the Act.”
The Bench expressed strong disapproval over the lack of preparation by the petitioner’s side, stating,
“You haven’t even annexed the certificate you’re challenging? You don’t know the provisions, don’t have the Act. Just because you think something shouldn’t be shown doesn’t make it illegal. You haven’t seen the film—only the transcript. Should we decide based on that?”
The Court further questioned why the actor Paresh Rawal had been made a party in the case, remarking,
“Why make the actor (Paresh Rawal) a party? He’s just performing a role. You want a disclaimer saying ‘this is not history’? Even historians differ—how can we decide which view is correct? In a film, anyone can express anything. Are we supposed to act as a super censor board now?”
The judges further added that the petitioners had not done sufficient groundwork, saying,
“You should have done proper research. Should have told us how the Censor Board certification is in violation of the principles. The arguments should be laced with law.”
When the petitioner’s counsel requested for more time, saying,
“Your lordship may grant us some time,” the Court responded sharply, “Some time for what? You are supposed to assist the court not the other way round.”
Ultimately, the Court advised the petitioner to seek an alternative remedy, noting,
“File a revision before the Central Government.”
In its final order, the Delhi High Court said:
“The grievance raised is with regard to the certification granted by the board of film to feature film titled ‘The Taj Story’. On being pointed out, the Cinematograph Act does not have any provision permitting the board to review its decision, the prayer cannot be granted. The petitioner are not against the exhibition of the film rather just want the producer to insert a disclaimer that the film does not portray history. The petitioner may invoke remedy under Section 6 of the Act with a liberty to approach the Central Government. Petition dismissed as withdrawn.”
ALSO READ: Rajasthan High Court Grants Asaram Bapu Six-Month Interim Bail on Medical Grounds
The court made it clear that it cannot act as a “super censor board” and that artistic expression cannot be curtailed merely because someone disagrees with the content.
The petitioners, who admitted to not having watched the film and relying only on its transcript, were advised to take proper legal steps if they wished to challenge the Central Board of Film Certification’s (CBFC) decision in accordance with the law.
Click Here to Read More Reports On The Taj Story
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
