CBFC says it cannot certify movies that undermine social harmony

When a movie, as a whole, persistently portrays a particular section of society in a derogatory and prejudicial manner and when such narratives are bound to disrupt public order and undermine social harmony, it could be denied certification in toto for public exhibition, the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has contended before the Madras High Court.

Filing a counter affidavit in response to an appeal filed by Youreka Cinema School, which had produced the movie Lakshmi-Lawrence Kadhal, CBFC Chennai Regional Officer D. Balamurali said, the board certifies films, including promos and trailers, for public exhibition in theatres and television channels in accordance with the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 2024.

He said, Section 5B(2) of the 1952 Act empowers the Centre to issue such directions as it may think fit, setting out the principles which shall guide the CBFC in sanctioning films for public exhibition. In exercise of such power, the Centre had issued elaborate guidelines to assist the members of the examining committees and revising committees in arriving at a decision.

The CBFC was duty bound to ensure visuals or words contemptuous of racial, religious or other groups or which promote communal, obscurantist, anti-scientific and anti-national attitude were not presented in a movie. It was also the duty of the board to ensure public order does not get endangered because of the screening of a movie for public exhibition.

Accordingly, both the five member examining committee as well as a nine member revising committee had unanimously decided Lakshmi-Lawrence Kadhal was not fit for certification because “it portrays its interpretation of various belief systems in their adaption of modern science, rituals based on beliefs, treatment of women and downtrodden and caste-based discrimination and consistently portrays one belief system in bad light and the other one as emancipating.”

The counter affidavit also stated “the refusal of certification is not founded upon any stray or isolated scene or dialogue, but upon the cumulative effect of the film viewed in its entirety. The film, as a whole, persistently portrays a particular section of society in a derogatory and prejudicial manner. The potential for incitement of disharmony and social unrest is not speculative but imminent and real.”

Mr. Balamurali went on to state: “Such narratives are bound to disrupt public order and undermine social harmony. The contents capable of provoking communal disharmony or widespread social unrest cannot be cloaked under the guise of freedom of expression.” After the counter affidavit filed by CBFC counsel K.R. Samratt was served upon the producer’s counsel M. Santhanaraman, the judge adjourned the hearing to February 11.