Table of Contents
Kangana Ranaut Responds to Bombay High Court's Ruling on Delay in CBFC Clearance for Her Film 'Emergency'
The court stated it cannot instruct the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to issue a certificate to the film’s makers, as such an action would conflict with a ruling from the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
Despite the setback, the actor and BJP MP declared a victory in court. In a post on X, she said, “The high court has criticized the censor board for illegally withholding the certificate for #Emergency.
The film, co-produced by Kangana Ranaut’s Manikarnika Films and Zee Studios, was initially set to be released on September 6.
However, Zee Entertainment Enterprises had to approach the Bombay High Court, requesting an order for the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to issue a release certificate.
The Bombay High Court’s recent decision to not direct the CBFC to issue the certificate means that the movie’s release is now uncertain and will likely be delayed. This setback significantly hampers the film’s chances of meeting its original release schedule
Government Sources On Kangana Ranaut's 'Emergency'
The film, which portrays the Emergency period imposed by the Indira Gandhi government in 1975, faced controversy after the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), the highest religious authority for Sikhs, accused it of misrepresenting Sikhs and called for a ban.
Kangana Ranaut later claimed that the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) had suspended the certificate for her film. Government sources revealed that various religious organizations have expressed concerns about the film.
Religious sentiments cannot be disregarded. The movie contains some sensitive content,” a source commented, noting that the Centre is carefully reviewing these concerns. This scrutiny has contributed to the film’s ongoing certification issues and potential delay in its release.
Kangana Ranaut's 'Emergency' Stuck In Massive Row What Are The Objections
Two Sikh organizations filed a Public Interest Litigation against the film in the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
In response, the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) informed the court that the movie had not yet been issued a certificate, leading the court to dispose of the petition.
During court proceedings, Zee’s counsel, Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond, argued before Justice BP Colabawalla and Justice Firdosh Pooniwalla that on August 8, the CBFC had notified Manikarnika Films that the film was deemed suitable for unrestricted public exhibition, provided some modifications were made.
Dhond further stated that on August 14, the film’s makers submitted the modified version of the film to the CBFC. This submission was part of the ongoing process to obtain the necessary certification for the film’s release.
On August 29, Manikarnika Films received an email from the CBFC indicating that the CD was sealed and requesting Kangana Ranaut to collect the certificate. However, the certificate was not handed over later, reportedly due to opposition from Sikh communities.
Senior Advocate Venkatesh Dhond argued that the CBFC, as a censor body, should not be responsible for managing law and order issues. He stated, “The maker of the film is a sitting MP.
The CBFC issued the censor certificate and could have simply stated that if unrest occurred, it would be the State’s responsibility to handle it.
They should not reconsider the certification process based on unrest; their role is to provide certification, not to manage public order.
Advocate Abhinav Chandrachud, representing the CBFC, explained that the certificate cannot be issued until it is signed by the Censor Board’s chairperson.
He also noted that the Bombay High Court cannot direct the CBFC to issue the certificate, as doing so would violate a previous order from the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The court rejected CBFC's contention that the certificate had not been issued yet.
The bench stated Once the filmmakers make the required modifications and the modified CD is successfully sealed we must assume that the CBFC has reviewed the film thoroughly and subsequently sent an email to Manikarnika confirming that the CD is sealed.
Denying relief to the film’s makers the court explained “We cannot issue this direction because the Madhya Pradesh High Court specifically instructed the CBFC to consider the representations from the Jabalpur Sikh Sangat before granting certification.
Directing the CBFC to issue the certificate now would violate the division bench’s directive.
The court further emphasized “Judicial propriety requires that we adhere to established orders and not issue directives that could contravene existing judgments.
Therefore we cannot instruct the CBFC to issue the certificate as requested by the petitioner.
However the court clarified that it was not dismissing the petition entirely.
Instead it ordered that the CBFC must review any objections related to the film.
The petition remains active with the directive for the CBFC to address and consider any concerns raised before proceeding with certification
When Mr. Chandrachud mentioned that the CBFC needed to consider additional objections and might require more time the court responded You can’t leave it open-ended.
Films are released on Fridays and significant financial investments are involved.” He countered The CBFC cannot be held hostage.
The bench instructed the CBFC to address the representations and make a decision before the next hearing on September 19.