4he appellant has submitted to this Hon+ble Court under Se/tion *01 o! the Indian Constitution.
Statement of Facts
P a g e |
•
4
4he appellant in the present matter is Doordarshan who hae de/ided not to tele/ast the do/umentar5 !ilm made b5 the respondent titled 67ather% son and Hol5 8ar6. 4he respondent is a !ilmma&er. 4he respondent No. * in *993 submitted his do/umentar5 !ilm% 67ather% son and Hol5 8ar6% to the appellant !or tele/ast on National networ& Doordarshan. Respondent No. * was to proide a U:mati/ Certi!i/ate !or the same to be aired b5 Doordarshan. 4he do/umentar5 !ilm was in two parts% the !ilm dealt with so/ial realities and issues su/h as patriar/h5% iolen/e% !undamentalism% suppression o! women et/. Part:I was gien ;U; Certi!i/ate and Part:II was gien ;A; Certi!i/ate b5 the Censor
•
A !ew lines about the !ilm and the produ/er7ather% Son and Hol5 8ar is the third part o! a trilog5 o! do/umentar5 !ilms against /ommunal iolen/e that the author made !rom the mid *9=);s to the mid *99);s. His two earlier !ilms In "emor5 o! 7riends #*99)$ #on building /ommunal pea/e in stri!e torn Punjab$ and Ram >e NaamIn the Name o! ?od #*99($ #on the A5odh5a /risis$ loo&ed at the @uestion o! /lass and /aste.
4he !irst part o! 7ather% Son and Hol5 8ar #64rial b5 7ire6$ loo&s at the problems !a/ed b5 Hindu and "uslim women within their own religions. Part ( #Hero Pharma/5$ eamines the /onstru/tion o! the alues o! 6manhood6. As the !ilm pro/eeds we be/ome pri5 to the inner ps5/he o! men and begin to learn how men are so/ialiBed into belieing that iolen/e is desirable. 4he !ilm loo&s at the rhetori/ o! street sellers o! aphrodisia/ who /reate !eelings o! male inse/urit5 and impoten/e in t heir audien/e and then o!!er their /heap medi/ine as a /ure. It then loo&s at the rhetori/ o! /ommunal politi/ians #both Hindus and "uslims$ and see that the 5 too are appealing largel5 to their male audien/es% the5 too are taunting them !or their impoten/e% but the medi/ine the5 o!!er !or the /reation o! 6real men6 is hatred against the other /ommunit5.
P a g e |
•
5
n *2.=.*991% the appellant issued a /ir/ular whi/h stated that Doordarshan will not tele/ast an5 ;A; /erti!ied adult or UA !eature !ilm on it. n (=.(.*99% the respondent handed oer a /op5 o! the U:mati/ Certi!i/ate o! the do/umentar5 !ilm to the appellant. Howeer% Doordarshan still re!used to tele/ast the do/umentar5 !ilm. n ((.9.*99=% the respondent No. *% !iled a writ petition be!ore the
•
A sele/tion Committee was /onstituted on *).=.*99= b5 the appellant to preiew the do/umentar5 !ilm produ/ed b5 respondent no. *. 4he sele/tion Committee obsered that% 64he do/umentar5 entitled ;7ather% Son ' Hol5 8ar; depi/ts the rise o! Hindu !undamentalism and male /hauinism without giing an5 solution how it /ould be /he/&ed. 4he iolen/e and hatred whi/h is depi/ted in the whole do/umentar5 will hae an aderse e!!e/t on the minds o! the iewers....6 4his de/ision o! the Sele/tion Committee was /ommuni/ated to the respondents on ().=.*99=. Against this the respondent no. * approa/hed
•
A Committee was dul5 /onstituted and on 1.=.())(% the /ommittee iewed the do/umentar5 !ilm and was o! the opinion that% 6the !ilm has a se/ular message releant to our times and our so/iet5 howeer% the !ilm /ontains s/enes and spee/hes% whi/h /an in!luen/e negatie passions and the /ommittee would li&e a larger
P a g e |
6
/ommittee with representaties o! religion and politi/s also to see the !ilm and !orm an opinion be!ore it is open to publi/ iewing.6 A larger /ommittee was /onstituted and iewed the do/umentar5 !ilm. 4he said /ommittee on 3.1.())0 re/ommended the s/reening o! this do/umentar5 !ilm on Doordarshan while obsering that% 6it ma5 alienate se/tions o! Indian so/iet5 and s/reening ma5 lead to rea/tions b5 organiBed groups.
•
n **..())0% the Prasar
4he High Court disposed o!! the petition b5 holding that the respondent was aggrieed o! the de/ision o! Prasar
P a g e |
7
ISSUES RAISED
•
8hether an5 !ilm produ/er has a right to insist that his !ilm must be shown on DoordarshanF
•
8hether the High Court was justi!ied in dire/ting the s/reening o! the !ilm /erti!ied as UA. Notwithstanding the !a/t as a matter o! poli/5% Doordarshan does not tele/ast adult !ilmF
•
8hether the poli/5 o! Doordarshan o! not tele/asting adult moies /an be said to be iolatie o! Arti/le *9#*$#a$ o! the Constitution o! India as has been held b5 the High CourtF
•
8hether or not it is open to the High Court to substitute its opinion !or that o! the /ompetent authorit5 as to whether a !ilm is !it !or being tele/ast on a publi/ medium su/h as DoordarshanF
P a g e |
8
SUAR! "F AR#UE$%S
•
Whether any film producer has a right to insist that his film must be shown on Doordarshan?
In the end% it all /omes to the /ertain guidelines held b5 Doordarshan. As a matter o! poli/5% the Doordarshan do not tele/ast !ilms whi/h are /erti!ied as 6A6 or 6UA6. Admittedl5 Part one o! the !ilm in @uestion has been /erti!ied as 6U6 and Part two as 6A6. 4he poli/5 o! Doordarshan o! not tele/asting 6A6 or 6UA6 !ilms has not been /hallenged b5 the respondent here. 4here!ore% the Doordarshan /annot be dire/ted to tele/ast the !ilm /ontrar5 to its poli/5. A !ilm produ/er should not hae a right to insist that his !ilm must be shown sin/e the best judge o! the nature o! the !ilm and the impa/t it will hae on the iewers is best judged b5 the Committee% as held haing some @uestionable /ontent whi/h /ould% in !a/t% raise some issues. 4hus% it should be rightl5 de/ided b5 the high authorit5 that the !ilm should be aired or not. 4he !ilm ma&ers should not hae a sa5 to whether their /ontent /an be shown to publi/% sin/e the part II is grant GA+ /erti!ied and /an leae a negatie impa/t on people+s minds. It is the @uestion o! majorit5 o! people that /ould be a!!e/ted b5 the /ontent% i! the moie presented thusl5.
P a g e |
•
9
Whether the High Court was justified in directing the screening of the film certified as U/A. otwithstanding the fact as a matter of policy! Doordarshan does not telecast adult film? A Committee was dul5 /onstituted and on 1.=.())(% the /ommittee iewed the do/umentar5 !ilm and was o! the opinion that% 6the !ilm has a se/ular message releant to our times and our so/iet5 howeer% the !ilm /ontains s/enes and spee/hes% whi/h /an in!luen/e negatie passions and the /ommittee would li&e a larger /ommittee with representaties o! religion and politi/s also to see the !ilm and !orm an opinion be!ore it is open to publi/ iewing.6 A larger /ommittee was /onstituted and iewed the do/umentar5 !ilm. 4he said /ommittee on 3.1.())0 re/ommended the s/reening o! this do/umentar5 !ilm on Doordarshan while obsering that% 6it ma5 alienate se/tions o! Indian so/iet5 and s/reening ma5 lead to rea/tions b5 organiBed groups. Despite another
produ/tion @ualit5 was unsatis!a/tor5 and its tele/ast would be iolatie o! the poli/5 o! the Doordarshan o! not s/reening 6A6 /erti!ied moies. ,en though it was held that the /ontent /ould somewhat impa/t the mind in a negatie !ashion% despite that the High Court deemed /on/entrated more on the awards and re/ognition held b5 the do/umentar5 and purel5 run o!! in the assumptions o! the message would be ta&en in a positie light b5 the publi/ due to that. •
Whether the policy of Doordarshan of not telecasting adult mo"ies can be said to be "iolati"e of Article #$%#&%a& of the Constitution of 'ndia as has been held by the High Court? 4he Constitution guarantees !reedom o! epression but in Arti/le *9#($ it also ma&es it /lear that the State ma5 impose reasonable restri/tion in the interest o! publi/ de/en/5 and moralit5. It was onl5 an a/t to prote/t the mind o! the iewers !rom the o!!ensie /ontent the !ilm might hold due to its religious /ontet% @uestion about manhood and all the /ontent it holds. It might ma&e an impressionable impa/t on minds% might being o! positie nature% but the Prasar
P a g e |
10
whi/h /ould promote iolen/e% its produ/tion @ualit5 was unsatis!a/tor5 and its tele/ast would be iolatie o! the poli/5 o! the Doordarshan o! not s/reening 6A6 /erti!ied moies. •
Whether or not it is open to the High Court to substitute its opinion for that of the competent authority as to whether a film is fit for being telecast on a public medium such as Doordarshan? 4he High Court /ould possibl5 not an appropriate judge !or the /ontent that is to be shown in publi/% up to par with the pro!essionals who &nows what to epe/t !rom the material that is being shown and to judge i! it o!!enses the mind o! a iewer.
AR#UE$%S AD&A$CED
P a g e |
•
11
ISSU, * Whether any film producer has a right to insist that his film must be shown on Doordarshan?
4he de/ision not to tele/ast the !ilm o! the respondent is based on alid and germane /onsiderations and no !ilm ma&er /an /laim that he has a ested right that a !ilm made b5 him must be tele/ast on Doordarshan. as a matter o! poli/5 the Doordarshan do not tele/ast !ilms whi/h are /erti!ied as 6A6 or 6UA6. Admittedl5 Part one o! the !ilm in @uestion has been /erti!ied as 6U6 and Part two as 6A6. 4he poli/5 o! Doordarshan o! not tele/asting 6A6 or 6UA6 !ilms has not been /hallenged b5 the respondent here. 4here!ore% the Doordarshan /annot be dire/ted to tele/ast the !ilm /ontrar5 to its poli/5. 4he tele/ast o! the !ilm is li&el5 to gie rise to /ommunal iolen/e and riots and that Doordarshan has rea/hed the remote /orners o! the /ountr5. It has a wide audien/e whi/h mainl5 /onsists o! illiterate and aerage persons who will be largel5 a!!e/ted due to s/reening o! the !ilm.
A sele/tion Committee was /onstituted on *).=.*99= b5 the appellant to preiew the do/umentar5 !ilm produ/ed b5 respondent no. *. 4he sele/tion Committee obsered that% 64he do/umentar5 entitled ;7ather% Son ' Hol5 8ar; depi/ts the rise o! Hindu !undamentalism and male /hauinism without giing an5 solution how it /ould be /he/&ed. 4he iolen/e and hatred whi/h is depi/ted in the whole do/umentar5 will hae an aderse e!!e/t on the minds o! the iewers....6 A Committee was dul5 /onstituted and on 1.=.())(% the /ommittee iewed the do/umentar5 !ilm and was o! the opinion that% 6the !ilm has a se/ular message releant to our times and our so/iet5 howeer% the !ilm /ontains s/enes and spee/hes% whi/h /an in!luen/e negatie passions and the /ommittee would li&e a larger /ommittee with representaties o! religion and politi/s also to see the !ilm and !orm an opinion be!ore it is open to publi/ iewing.6 A larger /ommittee was /onstituted and iewed the do/umentar5 !ilm. 4he said /ommittee on 3.1.())0 re/ommended the s/reening o! this do/umentar5 !ilm on Doordarshan while obsering that% 6it ma5 alienate se/tions o! Indian so/iet5 and s/reening ma5 lead to rea/tions b5 organiBed groups.
P a g e |
12
n **..())0% the Prasar
4he !a/t that Doordarshan is bound b5 the poli/5 whi/h preented the airing o! GA+ /erti!ied moies and also the /ontent whi/h was appropriatel5 judged b5 the held /ommittee% de/ided !or the impa/t o! the impressions it will leae on the mind when i! shown on the teleision. 4his !a/t spea&s that the !ilm produ/er doesn+t hae a right to insist that his !ilm should be shown i! he /an+t weigh the reper/ussions o! the a/tion when held in pla5.
•
ISSU, ( Whether the High Court was justified in directing the screening of the film certified as U/A. otwithstanding the fact as a matter of policy! Doordarshan does not telecast adult film?
In the instant /ase% the do/umentar5 o! the respondent has been /leared b5 the Central
n **..())0% the Prasar
4he de/isions o! these boards are done b5 pro!essionals and eperts who hae been in this line !or an amount o! time% and &now what /ould be o!!end people and the leel o! obs/enit5 and ulgarit5 whi/h /ould raise @uestions and negatie impa/t oer publi/
P a g e |
13
in general. 4here!ore% High Court /annot simpl5 wor& on the assumption that it did well internationall5 and earned award as su/h% that it /ould amount to the same response !rom the publi/ due to its o!!ensie /ontent. It is a de/ision to be made b5 eperts.
•
ISSU, 0 Whether the policy of Doordarshan of not telecasting adult mo"ies can be said to be "iolati"e of Article #$%#&%a& of the Constitution of 'ndia as has been held by the High Court? ne o! the most /ontroersial issues is balan/ing the need to prote/t so/iet5 against the potential harm that ma5 !low !rom obs/ene material% and the need to ensure respe/t !or !reedom o! epression and to presere a !ree !low o! in!ormation and idea. 4he Constitution guarantees !reedom o! epression but in Arti/le *9#($ it also ma&es it /lear that the State ma5 impose reasonable restri/tion in the interest o! publi/ de/en/5 and moralit5. 4he /ru/ial @uestion there!ore% is% ;what is obs/enit5F; 4he law relating to obs/enit5 is laid down in Se/tion (9( o! the Indian Penal Code% whi/h /ame about% b5 A/t 01 o! *919. Under the present Se/tion (9( and Se/tion (90 o! the Indian Penal Code% there is a danger o! publi/ation meant !or publi/ good or !or bona !ide purpose o! s/ien/e% literature% art or an5 other bran/h o! learning being de/lared as obs/ene literature as there is no spe/i!i/ proision in the a/t !or eempting them !rom operations o! those se/tions. 4he Indian Penal Code on obs/enit5 grew out o! the ,nglish Eaw% whi/h made /ourt the guardian o! publi/ morals. It is important that where bodies eer/ise dis/retion% whi/h ma5 inter!ere in the enjo5ment o! /onstitutional rights% that dis/retion must be subje/t to ade@uate law. In Ran'it D( Udeshi v( State of aharashtra % the /ourt said that the obs/ene matter must be /onsidered b5 itsel! and separatel5 to !ind out whether it is so gross and its obs/enit5 so de/ided that it is li&el5 to deprae and /orrupt those whose minds are open to in!luen/es o! this sort and into whose hands the boo& is li&el5 to !allJ. It depends on the /ontent that de/ides whether it will leae an impression on people+s minds. 4he !ilm /ontains a narratie o! a "uslim woman% a so/ial wor&er who has been raped b5 the /ommunal murderers o! her husband and that o! a Hindu
P a g e |
14
mill wor&er whose /hildren were &illed in the bomb blast whi/h o//urred in the a!termath o! the /ommunal riots. 4here are s/enes o! iolen/e and so/ial injusti/es. Also% there are /ertain s/enes in the do/umentar5 espe/iall5 one s/ene where a person is seen selling aphrodisia/s on the road and while doing so is ma&ing /ertain remar&s on the seualit5 o! males. 8hen it holds the /ontent regarding religion% whi/h easil5 o!!enses the mind% it should be &ept in mind. 4he Constitution guarantees !reedom o! epression but in Arti/le *9#($ it also ma&es it /lear that the State ma5 impose reasonable restri/tion in the interest o! publi/ de/en/5 and moralit5. It was onl5 an a/t to prote/t the mind o! the iewers !rom the o!!ensie /ontent the !ilm might hold due to its religious /ontet% @uestion about manhood and all the /ontent it holds. It might ma&e an impressionable impa/t on minds% might being o! positie nature% but the Prasar
ISSU, 2 Whether or not it is open to the High Court to substitute its opinion for that of the competent authority as to whether a film is fit for being telecast on a public medium such as Doordarshan? "an5 Committees hae s/reened this do/umentar5 !ilm in/luding a /ommittee set up b5 the appellants themseles inoling media eperts% representaties o! arious religions and politi/s% had reiewed the moie itsel! to be good and giing a good so/ial message although man5 had also epressed their /on/ern about the !a/t that it had a series o! /ontent% in/luding /ommunal iolen/e. At the same time% we also listen to a stirring spee/h made b5 a woman a/tiist on a street who ehorts people to 6remember their neighbours6 during /ommunal riots. 4he !ilm /ontains a narratie o! a muslim woman% a so/ial wor&er who has been raped b5 the /ommunal murderers o! her husband and that o! a Hindu mill wor&er whose /hildren were &illed in the bomb blast whi/h o//urred in the a!termath o! the /ommunal riots. 4here are s/enes o! iolen/e and so/ial injusti/es. Also% there are /ertain s/enes in the do/umentar5 espe/iall5 one s/ene where a person is seen selling aphrodisia/s on the road and while doing so is ma&ing /ertain remar&s on the seualit5 o! males. 4he
P a g e |
15
!ilm loo&s at the rhetori/ o! street sellers o! aphrodisia/ who /reate !eelings o! male inse/urit5 and impoten/e in their audien/e and then o!!er their /heap medi/ine as a /ure. It then loo&s at the rhetori/ o! /ommunal politi/ians #both Hindus and "uslims$ and see that the5 too are appealing largel5 to their male audien/es% the5 too are taunting them !or their impoten/e% but the medi/ine the5 o!!er !or the /reation o! 6real men6 is hatred against the other /ommunit5. 4he High Court /ould possibl5 not an appropriate judge !or the /ontent that is to be shown in publi/% up to par with the pro!essionals who &nows what to epe/t !rom the material that is being shown and to judge i! it o!!enses the mind o! a iewer.
)ra*er for Re+ief
'n the lights of the facts stated! arguments ad"anced! authorities cited the Counsel shall re(uest the Hon)ble *upreme Court of 'ndia to declare and adjudge+
a.
4he appeal is re@uested be granted.
P a g e |
b. Also shall pass an5 other judgment in the light o! justi/e% e@uit5 and good /ons/ien/e. All o! whi/h is most respe/t!ull5 submitted.
