Manas Dasgupta
NEW DELHI, Sept 4: In a major setback to the actor-politician Kangana Ranaut and other makers of the film “Emergency,” the Bombay High Court on Wednesday refused to direct the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to issue a certificate to the film and permit its release making it clear that the film is unlikely to be released anytime soon.
After couple of postponements, the film was scheduled to be released on September 6 before some Sikh organisations raised objections against it and demanded it’s scrapping stating that some of the depictions in the film hurt the religious sentiments of the community.
The Bombay High Court’s decision was based on the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s order of Tuesday in which it had asked the CBFC to decide on the representations made by the Jabalpur Sikh Sangat, the petitioners in the case, who have objected to the release of the film and its trailer, before issuing it a certificate.
The Bombay HC told the CBFC that it could not leave the issue open ended and ordered it to consider the objections raised by the petitioners and decide by September 18. The matter has been posted for further hearing on September 19. With this observation from the High Court, the makers of the film will not be able to release it as scheduled on September 6, 2024, and would likely have to wait for at least two weeks.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court had on Tuesday disposed off a petition against the release of the BJP MP Kangana Ranaut starrer Emergency, after the CBFC) submitted that the clearance to the film has been kept on hold. A Division Bench headed by acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf had directed the CBFC to consider the issues raised in the plea that was filed objecting to various parts in the movie’s trailer.
The writ petition was filed by two Sikh bodies — Jabalpur Sikh Sangat and Guru Singh Sabha, Indore — objecting to the film’s trailer and portrayal of people from the Sikh community. The petitioners alleged that various scenes of the movie violated the fundamental rights of the Sikhs and sought an unconditional apology from Ms Ranaut. The petitioners had objected to use of word “khalistan” and claimed that the portrayal could lead to young Sikh children wearing patka (turban) being teased as “khalistanis.”
The CBFC submitted that a certificate had earlier been issued for the film but the same was kept on hold after the board received objections from various Sikh bodies. In view of the pending certification of the film by the competent authority CBFC, the court refused to pass an order and noted that there was no point in “prejudging” the matter.
“Learned Deputy Solicitor General further submits that in view of the instructions and in view of the fact that the Film has not yet been certified and is under examination in terms of the Cinematograph Act and the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, in case any further representation is received from any organisation/body/individual, the same shall be considered while considering the certification of the Film,” the court noted.
Zee Entertainment Enterprises, the co-producer of the film along with Ms Ranuat’s production house “Manikarnika,” on Tuesday had moved the Bombay High Court, claiming that despite being informed of the film’s certification on August 29, 2024, the CBFC was yet to provide a formal copy of the certification. The makers of the film also alleged that the CBFC had “illegally and arbitrarily” withheld the certification of the film.
A Division Bench of Justices Burgess P. Colabawalla and Firdosh Pooniwalla said the CBFC had no powers to decide on representations or on any possible unrest resulting from the release of the film. “There would be no impediment for this court in directing the release certificate issued on August 29, 2024. Though there may be some substances, we are unable to pass any direction because the Madhya Pradesh High Court has specifically directed the CBFC to consider the representations of the Jabalpur Sikh Sangat before certifying the film.
“If we issue the direction, we would be effectively breaching the Madhya Pradesh Division Bench’s directive. Judicial propriety demands such orders ought not be passed. We, therefore, are unable to direct CBFC to issue the certificate as sought by the petitioner. We, however, do not dispose of the present petition. And we direct the CBFC to consider the objections, if any, at the latest by September 18,” the Bombay HC said.
The Bombay HC also asked the CBFC to be mindful of the fact that a lot of money had been invested in making the film. “Movies are released on Fridays. Crores and crores of amounts are invested. Ensure that you do not delay the decision further,” the court said.
The petition filed by Zee Entertainment Enterprises said that on August 29, the CBFC had sent an e-mail to Manikarnika Films. The e-mail intimated the makers of the successful certification granted to the film. However, when the filmmakers went to collect the certificate, it was denied to them. The petition further claimed that the CBFC had been ready with the certificate earlier but later refused to issue it.
“Citing the unrest against the film, the CBFC has withheld our certificate. Some groups have objected to our film just by seeing the trailer. CBFC is a censor board, and it has nothing to do with the law and order situation. That is for the State to decide and take care of,” advocate Venkatesh Dhond, representing Zee Entertainment Enterprises, said.
Responding to Mr Dhond, Abhinav Chandrachud, advocate representing the CBFC, argued that the e-mail the filmmakers were talking about was nothing but a ‘system generated‘ e-mail; it did not mean they had been issued a certificate, which was issued only after it was signed by the Chairperson of the CBFC.
“We are with you. How do these groups come to know that the film is offensive to some community without watching the film itself? CBFC has no power to go into the issue of representations, unrest, etc. The Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court has passed an order saying that just because of some law and order situation, a film cannot be stalled from release,” Justice Colabawalla said, taking Mr Dhond’s submission.
“Once these emails are issued by the CBFC, we are unable to accept the submission of Mr Chandrachud that the certificate has not yet been issued because it wasn’t signed by the Chairperson. Once the makers comply with the modifications required by the CBFC and the CD [compact disc] with modifications is sealed successfully, we must presume that the CBFC applied its mind and thereafter issued the email to Manikarnika Films that the CD of the film is successfully sealed. A subsequent e-mail has been sent informing the makers that the certificate has been generated successfully,” the Bench said.
“We know that there is something else happening behind. We don’t want to comment on it. The CBFC shall consider the objections and decide by September 18,” the Bench observed.
Zee Entertainment Enterprises in their plea filed on Tuesday contended that without certification, the film could not be screened in theatres. This hurdle would cost the entire film team and people associated with the film irreparable harm, the plea said. It also violated their fundamental right to free speech and right to carry on their profession under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g).
Emergency, a biographical political drama, explores the significant historical period of the declaration of national Emergency in India in 1975. The film’s trailer was released on August 14, and gained over 300,000 views on YouTube. Soon after the trailer’s release, public interest litigations were filed in the High Courts of Madhya Pradesh and Punjab, seeking a halt on the film’s release, and alleging that the film misrepresented the Sikh community.
Despite the setback, the actor and BJP MP from Mandi in Himachal Pradesh, claimed a win in court. “High court has blasted censor for illegally withholding the certificate of #emergency,” she said in a post on X.
The movie ran into trouble after the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, the apex religious body for Sikhs, alleged that it misrepresents Sikhs and sought a ban. Ms Ranaut later said the Censor Board had put on hold the certificate issued to her film. Sources in the government said some religious organisations have raised concerns about the film. “Religious sentiments cannot be hurt. There is some sensitive content in the movie,” a source said, adding that the Centre was seriously looking at the concerns.
The film, starring Ms Ranaut in the lead role, is based on the Emergency imposed by the Indira Gandhi government in 1975. Also starring Anupam Kher, Shreyas Talpade and Milind Soman, it is a dramatic representation of the 21-month period that is considered a dark phase for Indian democracy. It also touches upon Mrs Gandhi’s assassination and the Khalistan movement led by Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale in the 1980s. The script has been written by Ms Ranaut and the film is co-produced by Zee Studios and the actor’s Manikarnika Films.
The film was earlier scheduled for a release last year, but it was postponed to June this year. Owing to the Lok Sabha election, it was postponed again and the release date was September 6. With the film now awaiting the Censor nod, it is not clear when the movie will hit the screens. The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, an apex body managing Sikh religious institutions, has sent a legal notice to the film’s producers. They have said that the movie misrepresents Sikhs and historical facts. A week after the film’s trailer released last month, Akal Takht and SGPC demanded an immediate ban on the movie.
The SGPC secretary has said they have written to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and the CBFC, seeking a ban on the film. The trailer had “anti-Sikh” scenes and this has “deeply hurt the sentiments of the Sikh community,” he said. Gurcharan Singh Grewal, general secretary of SGPC, said it was good that the Censor Board has halted the film’s release. “The matter pertains to not just Sikhs, but also concerns of harmony in the country.”
