Prabhudayal vs The Union of India (UOI) and Others

Petitioner by Shri V. S. Kokje.

Respondents by Shri B.C. Neema.

They are heard.

The petitioner claims to be a social worker and Secretary of Rashtriya Charitra Nirman Samiti. He asserts (hat he is interested in maintaining the culture and values of life and that in his opinion, exhibition of excerpts even in regard to pictures granted ''A'' certificate by the Central Board of Film Censors by the Doordarshan in its programmes of ''Chilrahar'' and ''Chitramala'' is in violation of the provisions contained in this behalf in Part II of the Cinematograph Act 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). On these allegations, a prayer has been made that the respondents be directed not to exhibit any film granted ''A'' certificate by the Central Board of Film Censors on television.

Return has been filed and along with it, a copy of the notification dated 16-10-84 issued by the Central Govt. in exercise of powers conferred on it by Section 9 of the Act, has been attached. It has been urged for the respondents by their learned counsel that in view of the exemption granted by the Central Govt. by virtue of the said notification u/s 9, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at some length and in our opinion, the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents based on the notification u/s 9 of the Act has substance.

Section 9 of the Act reads as under :

"Power to exempt. -- The Central Government may, by order in writing, exempt subject to such conditions and restrictions, if any, as it may impose, the (exhibition or export of any film) or class of films from any of the provisions of this part or of any rules made thereunder."

On the other hand, the notification dated 16-10-84 issued by the Central Government under the said Section 9 reads as under :

"In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 9 of the Cinematograph Act 1952 (37 of 1952), the Central Government hereby exempts all Doordarshan Programmes from the provisions relating to certification of films in Part II of the said Act and the rules made thereunder subject to the condition that while clearing programmes for telecast, the Director General, Doordarshan or the concerned Director, Doordarshan Kendra, shall keep in view the film certification guidelines issued by the Central Government to the Board of Film Certification u/s 5B(2) of the said Act."

On a plain reading of Section 9, it is apparent that the said section, inter alia, contemplates exemption of any film or class of films, from any of the provisions of this part or of any rules framed thereunder. Section 9 is in Part II of the Act. Sections 5A and 7 of the aforesaid Act on which reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the petitioner also fall within Part II. In exercise of powers conferred by Section 9 of the Act, the Central Government can grant exemption in regard not only to any particular film, but to a class of films from any of the provisions of Part II of the Act. The effect of granting exemption u/s 9 of the Act would be that those, who exhibit films which are prohibited by Part II of the Act to be exhibited in a particular manner, will be in a position to exhibit those films or class of films notwithstanding the provisions contained in Part II of the Act by virtue of the exemption granted by the Central Government.

Emphasis has been placed by learned counsel for the petitioner on Section 7 of the Act which provides for penally for exhibiting any film in respect of which certification under category ''A'' has been granted. The bar in regard to exhibition of films is, therefore, obviously dependant on certification of that particular film. In other words, the bar is correlated with the certification of films in a particular category,

By the notification dated 16-10-84, the bar of exhibition in regard to those films which fall in the class of such films relating to which eerlification has been granted under Part II have been removed. The effect of the exemption now is that the bar placed by Part II of the Act even in regard to exhibition of films certified under category ''A'' has been removed if they are exhibited by the Doordarshan, of course subject to the conditions contained in the notification granting exemption. There is no assertion that the Doordarshan is not complying with the condition or conditions subject to which the exemption has been granted. Apparently, therefore, in view of the exemption granted u/s 9 by the Central Govt., the relief prayed for in the present writ petition cannot be granted.

Learned counsel for the petitioner then urged that Section 9 of the Act does not contemplate exemption for the benefit of Doordarshan alone. The said section contemplates exemption in regard to class of films and consequently the exemption u/s 9, if at all, could have been granted for the benefit of all those including Doordarshan, who were exhibiting the class of films in respect of which exemption had been granted. Suffice it to say, so far as this submission is concerned, that the petitioner is not holding any brief for any of those persons who may have been aggrieved by the exemption being granted in favour of Doordarshan alone and not in their favour also. For this very reason it is also not necessary to consider the question as to whether the grant of exemption for the benefit of Doordarshan alone will come within the purview of reasonable classification.

In the result, we find no merit in this writ petition which is accordingly dismissed.