Bombay High Court Directs CBFC Not To Insist On Film Makers Getting NOC From Yogi Adityanath For Certification Of 'AJEY' Movie

The Bombay High Court was today informed that the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has rejected the plea for certification by makers of a movie titled "Ajey: The Untold Story of a Yogi," based on a book written on the life of UP Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath.

During the hearing, it was submitted by the petitioners that the CEO of the CBFC had told the makers that they should go and meet Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and get an NOC from him, and the CBFC would certify their film. It was submitted that the chairman said he would help them get an appointment and meet the CM.

However, in hearing these submissions, the bench clarified: "You [CBFC] are not aggrieved with the fact that this film is based on a constitutional post holding person. So now you give them the reasons pointing out the scenes, dialogues etc, which are to be deleted or reworked. We make ourselves very clear, you will not insist on any certificate or affidavit from any authority for certifying the film."

Adv Naphade for filmmakers, also pointed out from the rules that the CBFC must tell them what the objectionable scenes are and that they will try and work it out.

A division bench of Justices. Revati Mohite-Dere and Dr Neela Gokhale thus said that the CBFC would need to inform the filmmakers about the grounds of rejection of certification so that the necessary changes could be made. The bench orally remarked:

"Why can't [CBFC] tell them what are the scenes? They can give a disclaimer. These are not reasons. This isn't as per the rules. Why don't you give them the grounds for rejection? By August 18, you tell them what the objectionable scenes and dialogues, etc., are. You could have told them that these are the dialogues and scenes which are objectionable. They will work it out. Rules tell that you give them reasons and the scenes and dialogues which are objectionable, and then they make the changes or work it out. But you didn't follow these rules."

Notably, the bench had pulled up the CBFC for rejecting the application of the makers without watching the film. The bench had asked the central board as to why it was reluctant to watch the movie before certifying it as the CBFC claimed that it rejected certification after going through the script of the film. 

The bench was irked to note that despite making a statement on July 17 that it will take a decision as per norms on the film's certification, the CBFC did not watch the film and simply rejected the application of the makers.

Today, during the hearing, Sr Adv. Abhay Khandeparkar for CBFC informed the judges that the central board has rejected the application of the makers of the film after watching it.

It was submitted that while the movie is a biopic, with the same name and the same timeline, the makers were saying that it is a fictional story.

When it was pointed out that the movie was based on a book, senior counsel submitted that the impact of the book and the impact of a film are very different.

Counsel stated that the Chairman of the CBFC had passed a reasonable order and it could not be gone beyond.

Court thus asked the filmmakers to approach the revisional committee, but directed the CBFC to give them detailed reasons for what was found objectionable.

Accordingly, the court directed the makers to file the application before the Revisional Committee tomorrow (August 8), and then the CBFC's Revisional Committee will inform them about the objectionable scenes or dialogues, etc by August 11.

The bench has further ordered the CBFC to decide by August 13. 

Appearance:

Advocates Aseem Naphade, Satatya Anand and Nikhil Aradhe appeared for the Film Makers. 

Senior Advocate AS Khandeparkar along with Advocate Dhirendra Singh represented CBFC.