NCLAT: Unenforced Equitable Mortgage is Corporate Debtor’s Asset, Not to Be Treated as Margin Money  ||  NCLT Approves Hindustan Unilever’s Ice Cream Business Demerger into Kwality Wall’s  ||  Supreme Court: Bar Councils Cannot Charge Over Rs 750 for Enrollment or Withhold Applicants’ Docs  ||  SC Cancels POCSO Conviction, Observing Crime Resulted from Love, Not Lust, After Marriage  ||  Supreme Court: Advocates Can be Summoned Only under S.132 BSA Exceptions with Prior Officer Approval  ||  Allahabad HC: Juvenile Conviction Cannot be Treated as Disqualification for Government Jobs  ||  Delhi HC: DV Act Rights of Daughter-in-Law Cannot Deny In-Laws’ Right to Reside in Home  ||  Delhi HC: Waitlist Panel Cannot Be Segregated, Vacancies Must Be Filled From Valid Waitlist  ||  Delhi HC: Matrimonial FIR Cannot Be Quashed If Couple’s Settlement Agreement is Not Executed  ||  Delhi HC Bars All India Carrom Federation from Using “India” or “Indian” in its Name    

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 2025 - All Rights Reserved