PIL against film based on 2014 Muzaffarnagar riots dismissed - Firstpost
You are here:

PIL against film based on 2014 Muzaffarnagar riots dismissed

  Updated: Jun 6, 2016 19:45 IST

#Cinematograph Act   #Muzaffarnagar communal riots   #NewsTracker   #PIL   #Shorgul  

Lucknow: The Allahabad High Court bench on Monday dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed against Shorgul, a film based on 2014 Muzaffarnagar communal riots, and asked the petitioner to move the competent authority to examine the matter.

Since the date of release of the film has been proposed as 24 June, the court said it hoped that the central government or competent authority thereof shall take a decision in the matter before release of the film.

A file photo from the Muzaffarnagar riots. AP

A file photo from the Muzaffarnagar riots. AP

A division bench of Justice Shree Narain Shukla and Justice Rakesh Srivastva gave this order on the PIL filed by a social worker of Meerut district Milan Som.

A direction was sought in the PIL to quash the certificate of public exhibition of the film granted under Cinematograph Act 1952, as also for issuing a direction to the respondents Union of India and others, to be more vigilant in their approach as regards religious and the image of famous public figures while dealing with issue related to religion and religious sentiments during the process of grant of certificate for public exhibition to other films in future.

Counsel for a respondent had raised objection against the maintainability of the petition for such a relief pointing out that there was a provision for regulation of exhibition under Cinematograph Act, vested with the central government. Therefore, the petitioner, being aggrieved with the film in question, had a remedy to approach the central government to ban or suspend the exhibition of film, the counsel contended.

The court said it had gone through the relevant provisions of the Act and found that the central government was vested with the power to suspend exhibition of a film in certain cases on being satisfied with the terms and conditions laid down therein.
Thereafter, it passed the order dismissing the PIL.

According to the petitioner's counsel Digvijay Nath Dubey, some scenes of this film were "objectionable and dangerous" to
social harmony, hence, exhibition of the film should not be permitted.

Union of India, state of UP and others had been made party in it, Dubey said.

Comment using Disqus

Show Comments