Madhya Pradesh High Court seeks CBFC response to PIL against Kangana Ranaut movie 'Emergency'

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Monday issued notice to the Central government and Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition challenging actor Kangana Ranaut's upcoming movie 'Emergency'.The Division Bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf asked the authorities to clarify whether the film had been certified yet or not.The Court also took note of the Centre's recent submission before Punjab and Haryana High Court that the movie had not yet been certified ."In view of the order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the Board is looking at it. There could be a possibility if there is some scene which requires editing, deletion .. probably the film will not release on 6th...," Justice Sachdeva observed..The PIL has been filed by Jabalpur Sikh Sangat and Guru Singh Sabha Indore. Advocate Narinder Pal Singh Ruprah, representing the petitioners, argued that the petitioners were representing various Gurdwaras, schools and colleges of Jabalpur and Indore.Ruprah said there was violation of Cinematograph Act in the case as the trailer of the movie showed Amritdari Sikhs killing people and a dialogue that 'you want votes, we want Khalistan'."We have got small children going to the school wearing patka and ... they are small children and others will tease them as Khalistanis. Pride of every Sikh is to join Indian Army. Sri Guru Granth Sahib has 1430 pages and 2500 times, the word Ram has been used... the entire history of Sikhs is so amalgamated with Hindus that you can't differentiate between Hindus and Sikhs," the counsel submitted. .The Court observed that it had not seen the trailer and sometimes it does not portray the actual position. However, Ruprah said the trailer was very popular and it showed Sikhs as secessionist and cruel."Contrary... during the first and second lockdown, the Sikhs in Delhi and the world over were at the forefront of helping these people. They were in the forefront of providing food and shelter to these people and even in Delhi there was an issue of oxygen... all Gurdwara had oxygen supply, they managed it from faraway places," Justice Sachdeva observed.The Court then said the respondents including the filmmakers would have to be given notice and listed the matter for urgent hearing on Tuesday..Meanwhile, in response to a similar PIL alleging that the movie contained scenes targeting the Sikh community, the Centre on August 31 told the Punjab and Haryana High Court that certification of the film had not yet taken place. It was submitted that all necessary precautions "including guiding principles for certifying films, i.e. interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, defamation or contempt of court shall be taken into account."The Court was also assured that CBFC would ensure that contents of the said do not hurt the sentiments of any community, including Sikh community..The Division Bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Anil Kshetarpal took note of the assurance given by the Centre and further observed that even after certification, an aggrieved person can approach the CBFC for review of the decision by a Revising Committee. "In view of aforesaid assurance given by learned Additional Solicitor General of India on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2, and availability of alternative remedy, this Court deems it appropriate not to issue notice in this case and leave it to the petitioners to avail the remedies under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983," the Court said.While disposing of the PIL, the Court also said it had doubt that the assurance given by the Centre shall not be breached by the CBFC..Advocate Narinder Pal Singh Ruprah and Navtej Singh Ruprah represented the petitioners before Madhya Pradesh High Court.Advocate Sandeep Shukla represented the Union government and Additional Advocate General Amit Seth appeared for State of Madhya Pradesh.--Advocates Deepinder Singh Virk, Imaan Singh Khara, KS Sidhu, GS Salana and JS Salana represented the petitioners before Punjab and Haryana High Court.Additional Solicitor General Satya Pal Jain with Senior Panel Counsel Dheeraj Jain represented the Union government. Additional Advocate General Saurav Khurana represented the State of Punjab..[Read Orders]