2007 (4) TMI 726 - SC - Indian Laws

Court Upholds CBFC Certification for National Film Awards, Overturns Exemptions for Film Institutes and Doordarshan.

DIRECTORATE OF FILM FESTIVALS & ORS Versus GAURAV ASHWIN JAIN & ORS

DIRECTORATE OF FILM FESTIVALS & ORS Versus GAURAV ASHWIN JAIN & ORS - 2007 AIR 1640, 2007 (5) SCR 7, 2007 (4) SCC 737, 2007 (5) JT 394, 2007 (5) SCALE 565 Issues Involved:1. Restricting the entry for National Film Awards to only films certified by the Central Board of Film Certification.2. Whether the Directorate should permit entry of uncensored films for National Film Awards as it does for Non-Commercial Film Festivals.3. Discrimination in exempting films made by Film Institutes and entered by Doordarshan from certification requirements.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Restricting Entry to Certified Films:The respondents argued that requiring certification by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for films entered in the National Film Awards (NFA) is an unreasonable restriction on their fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. They contended that films are works of art and should be allowed to compete without censorship, similar to entries in international film festivals.The court held that the policy of restricting entries to certified films is a matter of government policy aimed at encouraging the production of films of aesthetic and technical excellence. The policy ensures that only films intended for public exhibition, and thus capable of being seen by the public, are considered. The court emphasized that judicial review of government policy is limited to checking for violations of fundamental rights or statutory provisions and cannot interfere with the policy's wisdom or appropriateness. Therefore, the requirement for certification was deemed not an unreasonable restriction on the fundamental rights of the respondents.2. Permitting Uncensored Films for National Film Awards:The respondents argued that since the Directorate allows films to be entered in non-commercial film festivals without CBFC certification, the same should apply to the NFAs.The court clarified that the objectives of film festivals and the NFAs are different. Film festivals aim to provide a platform for filmmakers to exchange ideas and market their films, while the NFAs aim to promote national integration and unity by recognizing films of aesthetic and technical excellence. Given these differing objectives, the court found it reasonable for the government to have different policies for the two events. Therefore, the policy requiring certification for NFAs was not deemed discriminatory or arbitrary.3. Discrimination in Certification Exemptions:The respondents claimed that exempting films made by Film Institutes and entered by Doordarshan from certification requirements while requiring certification for others is discriminatory and violates Article 14 of the Constitution.The court noted that the exemptions granted to Film Institutes and Doordarshan were not justified. The exemption for Film Institutes assumed compliance with certification principles without requiring actual certification. Similarly, the exemption for Doordarshan was based on a 1984 notification, which was not relevant for film awards. The court concluded that these exemptions were illegal and could not be the basis for other filmmakers to claim similar exemptions. However, since the respondents did not challenge the validity of the exemptions themselves, no relief could be granted on this ground.Conclusion:The court allowed the appeal in part, setting aside the High Court's judgment except for the direction to permit the entry of non-feature films in digital format. The requirement for certification by the CBFC for films entered in the NFAs was upheld as a valid policy decision of the government. The exemptions granted to Film Institutes and Doordarshan were deemed illegal, but this did not entitle other filmmakers to similar exemptions.