Supreme Court Awards Rs. 6 Lakh to Man Acquitted After 6 Years, Faults UP Police Probe  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Can Restore Power on 50% Deposit in Arbitrary Theft Assessments  ||  Supreme Court: Cooperative Society Cannot Deny RTI Records as Personal if Registrar Can Access Them  ||  SC: CoC Cannot Withdraw Approved Resolution Plan Over Improved Corporate Debtor Finances  ||  Delhi High Court: 24-Week Limit Alone Cannot Restrict Medical Termination of Pregnancy  ||  Allahabad High Court Rejects Challenge to 18% GST on Online Legal Database Services  ||  Madras High Court: FIR Registration Does Not Decide Guilt; Prior Hearing of Accused Not Required  ||  Kerala High Court Orders Speedy Prosecution Sanction Process in Sabarimala Gold Theft Case  ||  Allahabad HC: Missing RT-PCR Report Cannot Bar COVID-19 Compensation if Records Confirm Infection  ||  MP High Court Directs Indore Police to Deploy Volunteers for Reporting Noise Pollution Violations    

Central Board of Film Certification and Ors. v. Pankaj Butalia and Ors. - (High Court of Delhi) (15 Feb 2016)

Personal views in interview on ‘sensitive’ Kashmir to not be censored

MANU/DE/0346/2016

Media and Communication

The Delhi High Court rejected calls from the CBFC against the grant of a ‘U’ certificate to a documentary about the suffering caused by the long term violence in Kashmir. The CBFC had directed four excisions from the documentary titled ‘The Texture of Loss’; additionally a disclaimer was to be added stating that the views in the film did not intend hurt to caste, religion or society. Two scenes sought deletion of the expression “disproportionate violence” and a statement by a family damning India after the loss of their son in military action. The Court agreed that violence in Kashmir remains a sensitive topic, however material in the film was not objectionable. Statements made during interviews were personal views which could not have a demoralizing effect on security forces nor could they be termed anti-national.

Relevant : S. Rangarajan vs. P. Jagjevan Ram and Ors. MANU/SC/0475/1989 Section 5A Cinematograph Act, 1952

Tags : DOCUMENTARY   OBJECTIONABLE COMMENTS   SENSITIVE TOPIC   PERSONAL VIEW  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved