Supreme Court

30.03.1989

S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjevan Ram and Ors.

MANU/SC/0475/1989

Protecting ‘morality’: Sparks in the wrong powder keg

The Central Board of Film Certification’s trimming of movies to conform to the ‘morals of society’ may occasionally lead to ‘silent’, blurry and somewhat neutered films in 2015, but it has toned down its rhetoric, really. In 1987 the certifying committee had refused outright grant of a certificate to a film that broke all moral code, despite being recommended for an ‘Unrestricted’ certificate – by questioning the government’s reservation policies. The committee argued vociferously against "Ore Oru Gramathile", for its potential to create “law and order problems” and instigate a “volatile” reaction in Tamil Nadu.

It is uncanny then how apt the Court’s discussion would be over 25 years after those events. “The standard to be applied by the Board or courts for judging the film should be that of an ordinary man of common sense and prudence and not that of an out of the ordinary or hypersensitive man… The anticipated danger [to community] should not be remote, conjectural or far fetched. It should have proximate and direct nexus with the expression.” Finally, the Court opined, “It is [the State’s] obligatory duty to prevent it and protect the freedom of expression… Open criticism of Government policies and operations is not a ground for restricting expression.”

Relevant

Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India MANU/SC/0133/1978
K.A. Abbas v. Union of India MANU/SC/0053/1970
Article 19 Constitution of India Act

Freedom of speech and expression

Tags : Film certification intolerance freedom of expression

Share :