LexSHUKLA versus STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
500
A
V. C. SHUKLA
v.
STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION)
April 11, 1980
B
[S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, P. s. KAILASAM AND A. D. KosHAL, JJ.]
c
D
•
G
H
Criminal Conspiracy, inf;redients of-Section 1201J of the
Indian
Pena{
Code, evidence required to prove criminal conspiracy explained-Approve;·s
ei•idcnce, value of.
Words and Phrases-"High Public or political (JjJices''-Meaning of.
Special Court's Act 1979, ss. 5, 7, 9 & 11-Constitutional validity nf.
Sri Amrit Nahata PW 1 was a member of Parliament and had produced &
film titled "Kissa Kursi Ka" ur..der the banner of Dhwani Prakash.
The, film
'
according to the prosecution was a grotesque satire containing a scathing criti-
cism of the functioning of the Central Government and was open to serious
objections which were taken even by the Ceia.tral Board of Film Censors. After
the film was ready for release, PW 1, Amrit Nahata, applied for certification
of the film on the 19th of April 1975 before the Boord.
The film,was viewed
on April 24, 1975 by an Examining Committee of the Board and whil.::· three
members were of the opinion that certificate for exhihition, with drastic cuts.
should b~ given, another member and Mr. N. S. Thapa, Chairman, disngreed
with the opinion of their colleagues a-nd accordingly referred the matter to the
Revising Committee. The Revising Committee after viewing the film agreed
by a majority of 6 :1 for certification of the film, the dissent having
been
voiced by Mr. Thapa, the Chairman and accordingly under Rule 25 (ii) of the
Cinematograph (Censorship) Rules, 1958, a reference waB made· to the Centrit.l
Government on 8-5~1975. In this connection, a letter was addressed to PW
6, Mr. S. M. Murshed, who, was at the relevant reriod Director in the Minis-
try of Information & Broadcasting, In charge of film and- T. V. Projects and
was appointed, Joint Secretary on 1st of May 1975. Before making his com-
ments PW 6 saw the film some time in the middle of May, 1975. Meanwhile,
PW 1, Amrit Nahata, was directed to deposit the positive print of the
film
comprising 14 reels of 35 mm with the Film Division Auditorium, situate at!
1, Mahadev Road, New Delhi. In pursuance of these directions PW 1 depO-
sited the positive print and an entry thereof (Ext. 17A) was made
by the
Librarian-cum-Projectionist of the Auditorium. PW 17, K. P. Sreedharan, who
\Vas a Technical Officer incharge· also inspected the reels and found them iit
order.
Although Murshed, PW 6, after seeing tho film aj!reed with the opinion of
the Chairman of the Board that the film may be1 open to objection on tho
ground that it was full of sarcasm and contained critici~m of the political func-
tioning of the Governmental machinery yet he was pe!('Sonally of the opinion
that certification for exhibition should not be refused.
PW
6
accordingly
recorded a note and submitted it to Mr. A. J. Kidwai, the
then
Secretary,
!\iinistry of Information and Broadcasting. The matter \Vas then examined
by Mr. I. K. GujraJ, the then Minister of Information and Broadcasting but
''·
•
•
•
-A"
V. C. SHUKLA V. DELHI ADMN.
501
no final decision was taken. Meanwhile PW J, Amrit Nahat,., filed a
writ
petition (Ex. PW I /D) in the Supreme Court. On the 23rd of
the
June
1975, a notice was issued by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to
PW 1, Amrit Nahata, to show cause why, certification to the film be riot' refused.
1he notice was made returnable by 9-7-75. Thus the Ministry of Information
and Broadcasting had taken a tentative decision to refuse- certification to the
film because of its objectionable and offensive. nature.
Emergency was proclaimed on the night of between 25th and 26th of June,
19i 5 and soon thereafter A 1 took charge as the Union Minister of Informa-
tion and Broadcasting and he was of thei opinion that the film
should
be
banned.
On July 5, 1975, in pursuance of the decision taken by the Central
Government, the Coordination Committee directed seizure of the film and that
its negatives, positives and all other materi<l!ls relating to it be takeru in the
custody of the Central Government vide Ex. PW 6/0. On July
10,
1975
A 1 directed that the film be banned for screening under the Defence of India
Rules, vide Ext. PW 6/E-4. Finally, on the 11th of
July
1975
PW
6
?vlurshed, passed an order that no certificatiOOI was to be given to the film for
public exhibition which was followed by a letter dated July 14, 19Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.