With the ruling that adultery is no longer a criminal offence, Prakash Jha’s con-man can now get away with an affair or two with married women
Roshmila Bhattacharya (MUMBAI MIRROR; November 13, 2018)

Prakash Jha’s upcoming comedy, Fraud Saiyyan, revolves around a fraudster who has turned marriage into a business. “He has 13 wives and multiple affairs which gets him into scraps with the law,” informs the National-Award winning director, adding that the idea came from his daughter Disha and her friend Kanishk Gangwal, and is inspired by a real-life fraudster who wed seven women in different towns and cities, none of them aware of the others.

“It’s a fun-filled con-caper set in the Varanasi, Mathura, Raisen, Bhopal belt with Arshad (Warsi) as a guy who very early in life realizes that he can make gullible young women fall in love with him and with the promise of marriage, on occasions even taking the pheras with them, can use them to support his lifestyle without the daily grind of a job.”

Naturally his choice of profession, gets him into a lot of problems. For instance, if the woman he is pursuing is already married, her aggrieved spouse can turn up on his doorstep with a cop in tow and threaten to have him thrown behind bars. “But now, thanks to a recent Supreme Court ruling, he cannot be arrested nor can criminal charges be pressed against him. This ruling has unknowingly come to the rescue of our protagonist though eventually he will have to face the consequences of his actions,” admits the veteran filmmaker.

According to a recent Supreme Court ruling, adultery is no longer a criminal offence. On September 26, a five-judge bench struck down Section 497 of the IPC and Section 198 of CrPC dealing with prosecution of offences against marriage, arguing that Section 497 is manifestly arbitrary in the way it deals with women and is destructive to their dignity and selfrespect. Then CJI Dipak Misra who headed the bench contended that adultery can be ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriage but it is not a criminal offence. Quiz him on his take on the judgement, and Prakash points out that the judiciary must have been taking into account that if a relationship is consensual, it cannot be deemed a criminal act.

In the past, his films, from the cop drama Gangaajal to the women-centric Lipstick Under My Burkha, had faced a censor roadblock. Given its controversial content, does he anticipate any trouble for this slice-of-life-comedy from the CBFC? “No, I don’t because there’s nothing derogatory in the film,” he says firmly. 

MUMBAI MIRROR (September 28, 2018)

The Supreme Court on Thursday directed that no coercive action should be taken in any part of the country against actor Salman Khan in relation to his upcoming production, LoveYatri.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra considered the submission that the movie, slated for an all-India release on October 5, has been cleared by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and despite this an FIR has been registered in Bihar and a criminal complaint is pending in Vadodara in Gujarat.

Several private criminal complaints have been filed against the film alleging that its name has hurt the religious sentiment of Hindus. It was earlier titled as Loveratri, but was changed to LoveYatri by the producers keeping in mind that the earlier title sounded like Navratri.

Meanwhile on Thursday, Gujarat High Court also adjourned to next month the hearing on the petition filed by a Hindu outfit, Sanathan Foundation, seeking a change in the title Loveyatri or its ban, saying hurt the sentiments of Hindus. The petitioner’s lawyer had told the court that even the changed title sounded similar to Navratri and hence is unacceptable to Hindus.

The SC bench took note of the plea of Salman who is the producer and said that no coercive action should be taken against the film relating to the content and the title. The lawyer appearing for Salman argued that once the certificate has been granted by the CBFC, the producer is entitled to show the film in the theatres, and no criminal law should be set in motion because of such individual perception relating to the name or any song in the movie.

“Having regard to the said assertion, we think it appropriate to pass a protective order that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner relating to the film, namely, Loveratri. That apart, no further FIR/criminal complaint/criminal proceeding shall be entertained by any investigating agency anywhere if the allegations relate to the said movie or the contents of the movie,” the bench stated.

MID-DAY (March 19, 2018)

The Supreme Court has directed a Dehradun-based novelist to give a reasonable offer to film director Rakesh Roshan for settling a case related to alleged copyright violation in the 2013 Bollywood blockbuster Krrish 3. Novelist Rupnarayan Sonkar had filed a police complaint in 2016 accusing Roshan of copyright violation and claimed that some scenes of the movie were based on his novel Suardaan.

A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra asked Roshan as to why he does not pay the amount and finish the case against him in which charge sheet has been filed. Senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, who is appearing for Roshan, said that he has not got any offer for settlement from the novelist side. "First let the offer be made from the other side. If it is reasonable we would certainly look into it," Jethmalani said.

The bench, also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, listed the matter for April 9 to enable the novelist to furnish a proposal to Roshan'a counsel. "We expect that the respondent No 3 (Sonkar) shall put forth his claim which would be reasonable so that the petitioner (Roshan) can be asked to accept the same," the bench said. It, however, clarified that the present order has been passed without prejudice to the points raised in the petition.

Roshan had moved the apex court against an Uttarakhand High Court order of July 20 last year which dismissed his plea seeking stay on his arrest in a case of alleged copyright violation. The high court rejected his plea on the ground that a charge sheet had already been filed against him in the case.

Sonkar had claimed that his novel was published in 2010 and hence, the case was filed against Roshan. In the chargesheet, Roshan has been accused of plagiarising portions of a story written by Sonkar and using it in Krrish 3. An FIR was registered at the Dalanwala police station of Uttarakhand in 2016 on the complaint of Sonkar, who had accused Roshan of copyright violation.

BOMBAY TIMES (January 19, 2018)

After anxiously waiting to announce the release date of Padmaavat, the film’s makers earlier this week officially announced that the movie will hit the theatres on February 25. But their troubles were far from over as its release was banned by the governments of four states — Rajasthan, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Haryana. However, yesterday, the makers heaved a sigh of relief when the Supreme Court stayed the ban imposed on the Deepika Padukone-Ranveer Singh-Shahid Kapoor-starrer, directed by Sanjay Leela Bhansali. The court’s order said, “We direct that there shall be a stay of operation on the notification and orders issued and we also restrain other states from issuing such notifications or orders in this matter.”

A bench of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices AM Khanwilkar and DY Chandrachud observed that the film has been cleared by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) with a U/A certificate for an all-Indian screening, after considering the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, which prohibits scenes that denigrate women. Bhansali’s legal counsel Harish Salve cited the 2011 judgment of the SC that allowed the screening of Prakash Jha’s controversial film Aarakshan as an example.

BT spoke to filmmakers whose labour of love has faced opposition from fringe elements, which indirectly posed pressure on the respective state governments, leading to an unofficial ban on several movies. And they were unanimous in saying that every ban — whether official or unofficial — ultimately affects their film, months of hard work and their freedom of expression.

– Team BT
-------------------------------

FILMMAKER RAHUL DHOLAKIA (HIS NATIONAL AWARD-WINNING FILM PARZANIA FACED AN UNOFFICIAL BAN IN GUJARAT)
I just feel that we keep wasting the Supreme Court’s time. The Chief Ministers of various states should know better than to ban films at their own whim and fancy. It’s about time someone told them that they are not above the law and that we should be left alone.

SHOOJIT SIRCAR (HIS FILM MADRAS CAFÉ FACED OPPOSITION IN TAMIL NADU FROM TAMIL OUTFITS)
The SC has taken the right decision as it’s perfectly democratic. No one has the right to take law and order in their hands and resort to violence. If you have a problem, take your grievances to court. Today, it’s about a film. Tomorrow, it will be about someone’s personal life. A state should give complete security to the film-goers and the film, which didn’t happen in the case of my film, Madras Café. People were scared to go to theatres at the thought of them being vandalised. Ironically, it was Tamil Nadu that saw the maximum sale of the film’s DVDs. If I have made a film and say it goes beyond the validity of society, you have a body like the CBFC, which will decide that. As filmmakers, we can’t go door-to-door and show our film when we have an authority like the CBFC, which is a democratic and government body. When every film or character that is even remotely close to real life faces trouble, the realism that a filmmaker wants to bring to cinema, suffers. If you feel that a filmmaker has gone overboard, you have a right to oppose, but not in this fashion. Responsible filmmakers won’t take creative liberties and create stories that are not in the history books. That’s our social responsibility as filmmakers. We need to make sure our work is rooted in reality.

ANURAG KASHYAP (HIS FILM BLACK FRIDAY FACED A BAN)
Until and unless the government doesn’t make a statement on this and make this into a non-practice, we will have to keep going to the courts. I hope the time comes when we don’t have to do that. I wish the makers (of Padmaavat) had done this earlier. I have been wasting my time and resources for a long time. In a country that easily takes offense and people taking offense scares the votebank politicos, this is and this will be a normal practice. So, either one takes the road of the law till the very end or give into what is expected of us. Either way, there is no point complaining. You fight or you give in…call it unfair but your rights won’t be given to you. You have to fight for them and stand up for them.

SHABANA AZMI (HER FILM KISSA KURSI KA WAS BANNED BY THE GOVERNMENT DURING THE EMERGENCY OF 1975; FIRE (1996) FACED PROTESTS IN MANY PARTS OF THE COUNTRY)
The film has been cleared by the CBFC. Of what value is it if the State cannot defend its own certificate? The filmmaker has been crying hoarse that there is nothing objectionable in the film that the CBFC has cleared. I’m sure it will become a huge success and I wish it all the best. The law of the land must apply with immediate effect so that a strong message is conveyed that the government has zero tolerance for violence or a call to violence against any citizen of this country.

MADHUR BHANDARKAR (HE WAS DRAGGED TO COURT OVER HIS FILM, INDU SARKAR)
The Supreme Court decided in my favour a day before Indu Sarkar released. And this, when I was fighting three different battles: one political, one with the CBFC and one with a girl who claimed she was Sanjay Gandhi’s daughter. Imposing or demanding bans have been happening for years to filmmakers. The courts have cleared films that were also banned by the CBFC on numerous occasions. People are diverse, their thoughts and opinions differ and they all want their opinions to be given prominence.

We have to be mentally prepared to face these challenges as filmmakers. I understand that and today, I welcome the decision of the SC. The state governments will now have to look into the law and order situation and ensure that the film gets a smooth release.
-----------------------------
As first reported in mid-day, Padmaavat makers cite Prakash Jha’s Aarakshan as precedent to overturn state governments’ ban
Sonil Dedhia (MID-DAY; January 19, 2018)

It was a victory of freedom of expression as the Supreme Court yesterday cleared Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Padmaavat for release, by staying the ban imposed by the governments of several states including Haryana, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh.

Comprising Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, the bench said it is the duty of states to maintain law and order and that the creative content is an inseparable aspect of Article19 (1), freedom of speech and expression.

As told to mid-day (January 18 edition), the producers’ counsel cited the example of Prakash Jha’s caste-reservation drama Aarakshan (2011), which was banned in certain states until the SC overturned the decision. Using that as precedent, the legal team argued that once the Censor Board has certified a movie, no state can ban it. It also argued that the makers had complied with the changes recommended by the Censor Board.

For an industry that largely shied away from commenting on the Bhansali’s months-long battle, it welcomed the SC decision with open arms. Shabana Azmi, one of the few actors to initiate a petition asking PM Narendra Modi to offer protection to Deepika Padukone, said, “I welcome the decision. But there remains the unresolved matter of no action being taken against those who placed a bounty on Deepika's head. Immediate action needs to be taken against these criminal elements so as to send out a clear signal to the country that the dignity of women is supreme and neither abusive language nor violent threats will go unpunished.”

Director Hansal Mehta reiterated how the banning of a film that has been cleared by the CBFC in the first place, is unconstitutional. “It’s a good sign that the Supreme Court has upheld the decision. The entire team of Padmaavat can heave a sigh of relief.”

Raza Murad, who plays Jalaluddin Khilji in the magnum opus, described it as a “victory of democracy.” “I think true change can be brought about when the government deals with people who create nuisance with an iron hand.”

MUMBAI MIRROR (January 18, 2018)

Producers of Padmaavat on Wednesday moved the Supreme Court to convince four states — Rajasthan, Haryana, Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh — to withdraw the ban on the film.

In their plea, the producers questioned the right of these four state governments to ban the film when the apex court has already clarified that the film’s screening can only be suspended in a particular area if there is law and order situation.

Chief Justice Dipak Misra has reportedly agreed to hear the plea today. The aforementioned states banned the period drama saying its release may pose law and order problems.

Featuring Deepika Padukone, Ranveer Singh and Shahid Kapoor in lead roles, Padmaavat is based on 16th century Sufi poet Mohammad Jayasi’s poem Padmavat. Film director Sanjay Leela Bhansali has been under fire for allegedly distorting history, which he has denied.

The film’s producers on January 14 announced that it is all set for a worldwide January 25 release in Hindi, Telugu and Tamil, adding that the period drama will be the first Indian film to get a global IMAX 3D release.
-------------------------------------
Mohar Basu and Sonil Dedhia (MID-DAY; January 18, 2018)

After trying for long to appease protests, Padmaavat makers have finally decided to approach the Supreme Court. The lawyers will cite the example of Aarakshan, and argue that once the censor board has certified a movie, no state can ban it.

When mid-day reached out to Mahesh Agarwal, one of the lawyers representing the case for Viacom18 Motion Pictures (co-producer of Padmaavat), he said that citing the example of Prakash Jha’s Aarakshan (2011), the counsel will argue that the state government cannot ban a film that has been cleared by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). “The ban is illegal. Once the movie has been certified by the CBFC, the state government has no power to issue a ban. A similar issue has been earlier settled by the Supreme Court in the case of Aarakshan. So we’ll take that as an example in our argument.”

For the uninitiated, Aarakshan, which dealt with the policy of caste-based reservations in educational institutions, was granted a U/A certificate by the Censor Board. However, the film was viewed as ‘anti-Dalit’ and banned in several states. But the Supreme Court cleared its nationwide release.

As for Padmaavat, Agarwal pointed out that the Censor Board examined all the allegations made against the drama and recommended modifications accordingly. “The Censor Board took advice from a special panel as well. The makers made the necessary changes, after which the certificate was granted.” It may be noted that besides changing the title (the original title was Padmavati), the film also carries the disclaimer that it doesn’t promote the practice of Sati, among others.

Shobha Sant (CEO, Bhansali Productions) is hopeful of the SC ruling in the film’s favour. “We have total faith in our judicial system. Jodhaa Akbar (2008) too was banned in seven states before its release and the apex court’s intervention resolved the matter.”

Padmaavat is currently banned in Rajasthan, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand and Madhya Pradesh.

Deems interference in the film, which is yet to get censor nod as 'premature'
MUMBAI MIRROR (November 21, 2017)

The raging controversy around Sanjay Leela Bhansali's period-drama, Padmavati, took a fresh turn on Monday when the Supreme Court dismissed a plea seeking deletion of certain alleged objectionable scenes from the film, terming it as premature.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra was informed that the film has not yet received the certification from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). "Our interference in this writ petition will tantamount to pre-judging, which we are not inclined to do," the bench, also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud, said.

Advocate M L Sharma, who had filed the petition seeking a direction for removal of all scenes of alleged 'character assassination' of Queen Padmavati from the movie before its release, argued that though the Censor Board has not given a certificate to the movie, the songs of the film have already been released.

Viacom 18, the makers of the Deepika Padukone, Ranveer Singh and Shahid Kapoor-starrer, had released a statement on Sunday, saying that they have deferred the movie's release which was originally scheduled on December 1. —Agencies

'No screening till objectionable scenes removed'

Madhya Pradesh chief minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan was quoted as saying on Monday that Padmavati would not be allowed to release in the state unless the objectionable scenes were removed.

"We have been reading about the queen's sacrifice from childhood. Distortion of history will not be tolerated. Unless the objectionable scenes are removed, I will not let the film to be released across the state," he addressed a gathering after a meeting with representatives of the Rajput community. He also announced that a memorial would be built in Queen Padmavati's memory.

Punjab Chief Minister Captain Amarinder Singh also joined the anti-Padmavati protests, contending that the Karni Sena's stand is justified. "Nobody will accept distortion of history and those who are protesting are rightly doing so," Singh reportedly said. Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has also warned the centre of possible law and order problems if the movie is released.

In Rajasthan, the epicentre of the protests headed by the Karni Sena, Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje has written to the union government asking that the movie not be allowed to screen till scenes that have offended Rajput and other groups are deleted.

Meanwhile, the nationwide clamour has also reached Jammu and Kashmir with National Conference leader Devender Singh Rana writing to Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti, asking her not to allow the film's release in the state till its contents are verified.

Swimming against the tide is West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, who has lashed out at the protesters. "The Padmavati controversy is not only unfortunate but also a calculated plan of a political party to destroy the freedom to express ourselves. We condemn this super emergency. All in the film industry must come together and protest in one voice," Banerjee said in a statement on Monday.

Amidst threats and protests from the Karni Sena and other fringe groups, Sanjay Leela Bhansali and Deepika Padukone have both been given security by the government. —Agencies

MEANWHILE...CBFC TURNS DOWN MAKERS' REQUEST FOR 'QUICK REVIEW'

According to reports, the censor board has turned down the Padmavati makers' request to quickly review and certify the film.

Last week, the censor board had reportedly returned the review application to the film's makers citing "technical issues" after protests erupted over the film allegedly distorting facts. It was scheduled to release on December 1.

When asked about the row on the sidelines of an event, CBFC chairperson Prasoon Joshi said, "We are trying to follow due process. We should sort out the issue through dialogue, not through arguments."