Censorship of cinema: India
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content. |
Cinematograph Act and Rules: 1952, 1983
Process, kinds of certificates
The Times of India, Sep 21 2015
Film certified `S' restricted to doctors and scientists
How is the public exhibition of films regulated in India?
The Cinematograph Act, 1952 makes provisions for film certification and regulates public exhibitions of movies in India. If a film or any part of it is deemed to be against the interest of the sovereignty , integrity and security of India or has the possibility of affecting friendly relations with foreign states, its exhibition can be barred. Films found to corrupt morality, have an adverse impact on public order, those intended to cause defamation or contempt of court or are likely to incite offence cannot be screened.
How are the provisions of the Act enforced?
The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), earlier known as the Central Board of Film Censors, was established in 1951 with regional offices in Mumbai, Chennai and Calcutta. At present, there are nine such offices located in Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Bangalore, Hydera bad, Thiruvananthapuram, Delhi, Cuttack and Guwahati. The process of film certifi cation is a Central subject. The states, however, are responsible for enforcement and bringing offenders to book.The Board consists of a chairperson and not less than 12 and not more than 25 other members appointed by Centre.
What are the various levels of film certification?
Initially, the Cinematograph Act had only two categories of certificates. A film would be certified `U'--unrestricted public exhibition-if the board thought it was suitable for family viewing, including children. The other category was ` A' certificates-given to films the board felt should be restricted for adults. In June 1983, two other categories were added. These were UA and S. The former means unrestricted public exhibition but parents of children below the age of 12 are cautioned and it is their discretion to allow the child to watch the film. The `S' category restricts viewership to specialized audiences like doctors or scientists.
What is the process of film certification?
The Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983 lays down the procedure that a producer must go through before screening of a movie. The film and video material is to be submitted to the regional office, which forms an examining committee to watch the film. For short films a twomember panel is formed, of which one has to be a woman.For feature length films, a four-member panel is formed, of which two must be women.All members of the panel submit their report, which may have recommendations about deletions, modifications and so on. The chairperson may approve the recommendations or refer it to a revising committee. According to recommendations of the board, the applicant will delete portions and submit them to the regional officer along with a copy of the film as certified. If the producer is unsatisfied , he or she can go to Film Certification Appellate Tribunal.
2001-2011: 256 films banned
256 films banned by Censor Board in last decade By NewsDesk • DearCinema February 9, 2013
Between 2001 and 2011, a total 256 films have been denied certification by the Central Board of Film Certification, as per the information obtained by Lucknow based RTI (Right to Information) activists Amitabh and Nutan Thakur.
The maximum number of films denied certification in one year was 59 in 2006, followed by 33 films in 2002 and 31 in 2004. Only 9 films were denied certification in 2010.
In 2001 all the 19 films denied certificate were English films.
A maximum number of 78 Hindi films have been banned followed by 52 English films. Among South Indian films; 51 Tamil, 33 Kannada, 15 Telugu and 14 Malayalam films have been denied certification in this period while 5 Marathi films have been denied certificate.
Only one Bengali film (2011- Kaal Aaj Kaal) and 1 Gujarati film (2010- Hun Re Vijogan Tara Nam Ni) was banned during this entire period while 2 Bhojpuri (Garda Garda Ho jaaye, Mumbai Bam Visfot Kand) and 2 Haryanavi films (Jija Teen Taang Ka, Padosan Thanedar) in 2006 were also denied certificates.
Most of these films had sexually implicit material. They include films like Frivolous Lola (2001), Adamkhor Hasina, Qatil Shikari, Khooni Raat (2002), Aalingnam (Malayalam- 2002), Biwi Tumhari Bacche Hamare (2003), Yoga Teacher, Divya Teacher (Tamil- 2003), Aag Hai Ye badan (Hindi- 2004), Bhookh, Jo Andar Fit woh baahar bhi Hit (2005), Maa Ninello Naanalle (Kannada), Preethiya, Rambha (Kannada-2006), Husn Bewafa, Sanam Harjai (Hindi) 2006, Model (Kannada)- 2007, Mumbai Aamchich (Marathi- 2007), Master Eke Master (Marathi- 2008), Maadosha (kannada- 2008), Bedherencha Bayangaram (Telugu- 2008), Back to Honeymoon (Hindi- 2009), Thee, Naalai Namade(Tamil- 2009), Paribhavam (Malayalam), Hawaa, Mestru (kannada- 2009), Deva Leelai (Tamil), Panchavati (Kannada), Yaar, Kattupuli, Itumbu (Tamil) etc.
Parzania
Other films include The Irreputable Truth about Demons (New Zealand horror film), The Mexican, a 2001 American comedy film directed by Gore Verbinski and starring Brad Pitt and Julia Roberts and Rahul Dholakia directed Parzania (English, partly Gujarati- 2005), based on Gujarat riots.
2008, 2009: Telugu, Hindi, Tamil, Kannada films
Tollywood's penchant for sleaze gets under censor's skin
Ch Sushil Rao, TNN | May 21, 2011, 12.27am IST
HYDERABAD: It's not there in the hall of fame, look for it in the hall of shame and Tollywood is there occupying the centrestage.
The Telugu film industry, which boasts of producing the second most number of films in the country, has earned the dubious distinction of being on the top in trying to peddle obscenity, vulgarity and violence in films.
The scissors of the censors, however, have often cut the dreams of filmmakers short by insisting on deleting all objectionable scenes.
In terms of length, for the year 2008 a total of 8,073.68 metres of film had to be cut by filmmakers as the censors found it objectionable. Compare this figure to Bollywood's movies and the length advised to be cut was only 1,825.66 metres.
Similarly, for the year 2009 also (the latest year for which detailed statistics are available), the Telugu film industry showed its ability to outclass other language films. A total of 4,761.20 metres of film had to be cut in the Telugu movies censored at the Hyderabad regional office as against 2,472.63 metres which suffered the censors cut in the Mumbai regional office.
During 2008, as against 286 Telugu films released, 248 Hindi films were released. However, during 2009, while 235 Hindi films were released, 218 Telugu films hit the theatres.
Telugu filmmakers have shown an obsession for obscenity, even if they know it may not get past the censors. "The obscene stuff is shot anyway hoping that the film gets a clearance with all that," says a film analyst. "After we watch the film, we have a sitting with the film producer and the director and advise them about the cuts to be made. They do give their point of view, but the CBFC follows strict guidelines in not passing what is objectionable," said CBFC regional officer A Dhanalakshmi.
Take for instance, the movie `Nenu Na Rakshasi' starring Rana Daggubati directed by Puri Jagannath which got released on April 29, 20011. Item bomb Mumaith Khan had to bear the brunt of the censors as they got the scenes in which her body exposure was considered vulgar in a cafe and on a flight. Some 25 feet of film had to be cut for this. The censors insisted that Mumaith Khan's exposure of her cleavage in a close-up shot in a song be deleted. This apart, vulgar words and abuses were got deleted by the censors.
In the movie `Lokame Koththaga' released on April 8, 2011, Jyothi's intimate love scenes with her boyfriend had to be sliced. To give more examples, in the film `Mantra' starring Charmee and directed by Tulasiram, the censors imposed as many as 10 cuts which meant 230ft of film had to be sliced and given an `A' certificate.
`Ala Na Pellanta' released in March this year starring Allari Naresh too suffered censor cuts for unnecessary exposure of the heroine in a bikini at a swimming pool.
It is only getting worse in Tollywood. In a recently released film, a filmmaker went to the extent of incorporating a dialogue which said `One plus one free' referring to a daughter and mother. Shocked censors naturally did not allow it to pass.
The Tamil film industry which encourages buxom beauties had also to suffer the brunt of the censors but this was to an extent of only 3,920.4 metres of length of film in the year 2009. The Kannada film industry was spared with 2,898.79 metres of cuts and Bengali films only 116.59 metres of cuts.
2010: Adults only films
Hindi film-makers get bolder, prefer 'A' rating
Viju B & Bharati Dubey, TNN | Apr 4, 2011, 05.49am IST
MUMBAI: Film-makers have been dishing out more adult-only movies for discerning audiences across the country in the last three years. While there was a decline in the number of movies made in the universal category in the last three years, the corresponding period showed an increase in the number of adult movies in major languages across the country.
Hindi movies topped the list of adult movies, with 61 out of the 215 Hindi movies last year, with an increase of 3% in the last three years. Tamil movies came second, with 50 adult movies out of the 202 movies made last year, an increase of 4% in the last three years.
The vibrant Telugu movie industry was not far behind, with 45 adult movies out of the 181 Telugu movies made last year, an increase of 3% in the last three years.
Though the Bengali film industry produced only 17 adult movies out of the 110 movies last year, there was an 8% increase in the adult movie category in the last three years, according to data from the Central Board of Film Certification ( CBFC).
Film-makers and experts said the censor board's new policy of preferring to give an 'A' certificate rather than cut scenes and increasing maturity of audiences, who are willing to appreciate such movies, are reasons for the increase in the adult content in Indian movies.
Film-maker Sangeeta Datta, who directed Sharmila Tagore in Life Goes On, said that newer and bolder themes, especially dealing with sexuality, are being experimented by film-makers in West Bengal. "'Memories of March is one such bold film. Also, the censor board is asking the film-maker to cut scenes, which is why 'A' certificate films have gone up," Datta said.
RTI activist Chetan Kothari, who filed a query on the issue, said some film-makers insert explicit scenes to make the movie into a commercial hit. Film-maker Mahesh Bhatt said, "The internet has increased the appetite of the audience for adult content. Film-makers are catering to this demand to stay in business."
Film-makers say that they are forced to accept an 'A' certificate so that the film's storyline does not get disrupted. Producer Kumar Mangat accepted an 'A' certificate for Aakrosh, which dealt with the politics of violence and greed after censor board officials suggested.
Film-maker Madhur Bhandarkar, who has been urging the censor board to change the age group category for viewing of films, said he was still waiting for new guidelines from the information & broadcasting ministry, which will introduces a 15+ category.
"It will get me back my audiences. I lost about Rs 7 crore in 'Dil Toh Bachcha Hai' only because of the 'A' certificate and teenagers could not view it.
Bhandarkar's 'Fashion', which tried to explore the seamier side of the Indian fashion industry, was given an 'A' certificate as drinking and love-making scenes were shown. The censor board felt the scenes would have a bad influence on teenagers.
2011-2015: Hindi-Urdu films with censorship problems
Censor board 'cuts' that made headlines
The Times of India<> The Times of India
The Censor Board of India has asked filmmakers to chop out scenes from their movies on several occasions. While most filmmakers comply by the rules without making much noise, there are those who end up creating headlines in some way or the other. The Times of India took a look at some of those...
Action Jackson Despite the fact that Ajay Devgn's Action Jackson has been cleared by the Censor Board of Film Certification (CBFC) with a 'UA' certificate, the CBFC has removed one particular word from the film's soundtrack. According to a report on Pinkvilla.com, the word 'temple' has been asked to be removed from Ajay Devgn's monologue in the film. The report also quotes the film's director, Prabhu Dheva as saying that since the change didn't make any difference to the dialogue, they had already replaced the offending word with 'statue.' Prabhu Dheva insists that it was no problem at all.
Badlapur According to a report in Mumbai Mirror, Sriram Raghavan refused to delete certain scenes from Badlapur, and agreed to the 'A' certificate issued by the Censor Board. The film was screened for the censors and they were willing to give it a 'UA' rating, provided that the makers agreed to major cuts recommended by the Examining Committee. "But Sriram categorically told the Board that he's very happy with an 'A' certificate as long as no scenes are cut. This caused some surprise as most filmmakers put up a fight," a source close to the development informed. The scenes asked to be chopped off included a few lovemaking shots and certain portions depicting graphic violence.
Badmashiyaan According to a report in Mumbai Mirror, the film Badmashiyaan, that releases on March 6, has been passed with 12 cuts. A rom-com revolving around a gold-digging con woman, the film was given 12 cuts and cleared with a UA certificate on February 23. Bollywood's patented phrase, 'kutte kaminey' had to be redubbed as 'andha kahin ka' and 'ma ki aankh' with 'ma ki eye.' Several other words like 'tutiya' (mistaken for chu**ya) and 'pichwada' were muted, along with the phrase 'Mard to saare kutte hote hain.' The word 'haramkhor' was deleted. What was even more baffling was that in a scene where the girl goes to file an FIR for molestation, the words 'hum bistri' had to be muted from her dialogue but the same words, when used by the guy, were allowed. Even 'my ass' which was not used in a derogatory manner, was frowned upon. The film's director Amit Khanna agrees that he had to give in as the release date of the film was near,
Chakravyuh Prakash Jha's films are high on politics and social issues and it comes as no surprise that he makes it to our list here. Chakravyuh starring Abhay Deol, Arjun Rampal, Esha Gupta, Manoj Bajpayee and Anjali Patil ran into trouble with the Censor Board as well. As per a report in Times of India, the film ran into trouble with the Censor Board over the song 'Tata, Birla, Ambani aur Bata, sab ne hai desh ko kaata.' The song was sung by Kailash Kher and picturised on Abhay Deol. The Censor Board did not pass the song because members felt it was a personal attack on the country's top industrialists and intended to defame them. Although, Prakash Jha insisted that the names of the industrialists are used to represent a mindset and not target anyone, the Board thought otherwise. The report said that the song was cleared by the Board only after they added a disclaimer.
Dedh Ishqiya Madhuri Dixit, Naseeruddin Shah, Arshad Warsi and Huma Qureshi starrer Dedh Ishqiya also ran into trouble with the Censor Board, however, only post the release. The film was cleared except for a particular scene where Arshad Warsi visits a brothel, which was blurred. However, according to a news report, the scene found its way into the film and members of the Board saw the film without the blurred version at a screening. According to a mid-day report, the producers of the film initially blamed the cinema halls and their bad lighting. As the result, they later accepted their fault. As per the report, a show cause notice was sent to the filmmaker post this incident.
Delhi Belly Aamir Khan's Delhi Belly was another film that courted controversy with the Censor Board. According to a Mumbai Mirror report, 'Delhi Belly' was given an A certificate. However, for its television rights, the film had to face some strict diktats by the Board. As per the Mumbai Mirror report, the Board had apparently agreed to release the film's satellite rights after it made roughly 17 to 18 cuts. Not just that, after this, the Board had apparently asked the filmmaker to make further changes.
Dharam Sankat Mein: According to a report on Mid-day.com, even after cutting off a few scenes from their film, Dharam Sankat Mein, the makers have been asked to beep out certain words for the film to be cleared by the Censor Board. A source from the film unit has been quoted in the report as saying that they had expected a few cuts considering that the subject of the film was a bit sensitive but they were surprised that they had a problem with words such as saala, kambakht and musalmaano which are very commonly used. The source add that they had to agree to beep the words as they wanted to release the film.
Dilliwaali Zaalim Girlfriend According to a report on Bollywoodlife.com, Dilliwaali Zaalim Girlfriend has been given a U/A certificate by the Censor Board after 63 mutes. The muted portions include words like saala and saali. The director of the film, Japinder Kaur, is rather amused by the cuts. She is quoted in the report as saying that if there is no thematic issue, she doesn’t understands the problem in just picking up singular words that are local lingo. She also suggests that to bring about any change in rules, guidelines should be set systematically with time limits and that the Censor should inform that films going into production now should follow new rules; because they have the space to, not the ones that are already completed and have been in working progress in the last 1-2 years.
Fifty Shades Of Grey Hollywood film, Fifty Shades Of Grey's release in India was postponed due to censorship problems. According to a Mumbai Mirror report, Hollywood BDSM drama 50 Shades of Grey's Indian release is in a limbo. The film has been banned in UAE and Malaysia and there's a question mark over its Indian release, the report stated. Reportedly, the film explores the theme of bondage, dominance, sadism and masochism and features 20-minutes of explicit sex scenes. The studio reached out to the CBFC seeking a screening in India, stated the Mirror report quoting a source, “They haven't been given an appointment yet but once that is sorted, the makers are optimistic to release the film in the last week of February or early March." The Indian arm of the Hollywood-studio producing the film has sent back the film print to LA for “internal-trimming," the report further stated. “Once the Indian censors suggest cuts, and in this case they are anticipating several, the producers have to consult with the studio bosses in Los Angeles on the changes prior to the Indian release. To ensure that the cuts are minimised, the studio is sending a trimmed version to the censors. Once the drive codes are submitted, the Board will take a call on the cuts," the report quoted a source from the CBFC. Another member of the Board, Ashoke Pandit said to Mirror, "It will follow the normal process of censoring like any other Hollywood film coming to India. How many cuts it gets will depend on the members present at the screening."
Finding Fanny Homi Adajania's Finding Fanny was the latest to join the bandwagon of films that were asked to delete certain portions from it, before the film it had hit theatres. According to a Mumbai Mirror report dated August 25, Homi Adajania has been asked to delete a 'vulgar' line from the film where actress Deepika Padukone tells actor Arjun Kapoor, "I'm a virgin". As per the report, Homi argued that the word 'virgin' has been passed earlier in films like Dil Se (1998) where Preity Zinta asks Shah Rukh Khan whether he is a virgin. In 2 States (2014) too, after a steamy scene, Alia asks Arjun if this is his "first time." However, Homi was reportedly asked to chop it if he wanted a UA certificate. The Censor Board apparently objected to Dimple Kapadia's posterior shot in the film as well. As per a Mumbai Mirror report dated August 27, the veteran actress sounded displeased with the CBFC over this and reacted, "I need to have a word with these people. They pass kissing scenes and nudity, but object to my fully-clothed bum." [sic]. Reportedly, CBFC Chairperson Leela Samson has admitted that deleting the line from the movie was a 'mistake'. As per a Mumbai Mirror report dated September 6, the line had been cleared and was back in the film. [The print Indpaedia’s volunteers saw did not have the line. The Deepika character only mentions that she had not been kissed.]
Grand Masti According to a report on Mid-day.com, the censor board wants 218 scenes deleted from Grand Masti’s TV premiere. The sex comedy film might finally see a television premiere about 17 months post its theatrical release. Regional officer of Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), Rahul Vaidya has sent a show cause notice to the makers asking them to effect 218 cuts for small screen viewing, the report stated. According to the report, filmmaker Inder Kumar says that the process of deleting the scenes is already underway.
Happy Ending Saif Ali Khan's Happy Ending, co-produced by Dinesh Vijan, was given a UA certificate only after three cuts, reports Mumbai Mirror. Certain expletives like `as*h*l*' and `f****rs' have been modified to 'ass' and 'fokers' and the word 'naked' has been deleted. However, a member of the cast is exultant that words like 'penis' and 'ch***ya' have not got the cut, the report states. “We let the word 'ch**iya' pass if it isn't uttered too often in a film. But, the word 'penis' should never be passed. The print that was screened for us was barely audible and a lot of what was being said on screen, was pure guesswork on our part," the report quotes a CBFC member (on condition of anonymity). When questioned on the word 'penis', Raj quipped to Mirror, “It was actually a reference to peanuts which Ranvir Shorey and Saif have while having a drink. But perhaps it doesn't sound like peanuts."
Jism 2 Pooja Bhatt ran into trouble with the Censor Board when her film Jism 2 was about to release. The movie marked adult film star Sunny Leone's debut in Bollywood, but that wasn't the reason the Censor Board withheld their certification. Apparently, the Board asked director Pooja Bhatt to chop off the length of four love making scenes from the film, as per a report in Times of India. The scenes were asked to be reduced to half, only then would it get an adult certificate. Sunny Leone featured in all the four love making scenes in the film. Pooja Bhatt complied and the scenes were reduced in length accordingly. However, she mentions that in one love making scene, a part of Sunny Leone's breast was visible and that was also one of the things pointed out by the board.
Margarita With A Straw... Here's how the Censor Board reacted to Kalki Koechlin's lesbian scenes in Margarita With A Straw... According to a report in Mumbai Mirror, Censor Board's Revising Committee has cleared a same-sex lovemaking scene from the film, Margarita With A Straw but strangely insisted on trimming straight coupling. The Censors wanted a shot showing the lead character peeing cut, and a 13-second kissing scene between Kalki and her lesbian lover removed from the film which is about a woman with cerebral palsy coming to terms with her queer sexuality. But in a welcome move, the film has now got a clean chit from the CBFC's Revising Committee. “We've come out with only a single cut!“ says an elated Shonali Bose, the producer-director of the film. However, the director is not happy with the Revising Committee shortening a 16-second scene involving a straight couple having sex. Shonali was asked to tone it down by "50 percent" because, to quote a Board member, “too much ho raha hai." <>However, Shonali hadn't expected things to be so smooth. She had anticipated more friction with the CBFC.
According to a Mumbai Mirror report, Censor Board has told the director of Margarita, With A Straw that they have moral guidelines to follow. Despite assurances from the Minister of State for Information & Broadcasting, Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore that the Central Board of Film Certification is a 'certifying body' not a 'censoring one', the Board continues to wield its scissors on films, the report stated. And its latest casualty is Shonali Bose's award winning film Margarita, With A Straw, a coming-of-age story of a young girl suffering from cerebral palsy, played by Kalki Koechlin, who comes to terms with her queer sexuality. The report further stated that after watching the film, the Examining Committee (EC) asked the makers to tone down a kissing scene between Kalki and Sayani Gupta. "There is a 12-second long kiss between the two characters, but the CBFC had problems with it. They want me to reduce it to just a few seconds. I explained that as it is their first kiss, it can't be that brief," the report quoted Shonali. <>The members also asked Bose to edit out a scene when Kalki shows the middle finger. Another sequence shows a male character removing her undergarments so that she could use the washroom and she then proceeds to urinate. This too riled the Censors, the report further stated. "The film will go to the Revising Committee now. I hope better sense prevails as the EC, to my shock, told me they had moral guidelines to follow," an exasperated Shonali told Mirror.
According to a report on Ndtv.com, Aamir Khan, who was present at the trailer launch of the film Margarita, With a Straw, said he was not in favour of censorship. The actor stated that he was not in favour of censorship but was in favour of the rating system. Also adding that one should not try and pre-empt what the Censor certification should be and how the members will react. Further to the report on Ndtv.com, the actor also added that in a democratic country like India where there was freedom of speech, it would be quite difficult to not allow a film to release on unreasonable grounds. Aamir also expressed his surprise at NH10 (initially) being denied a certification by the Censor Board and called it rather unusual and unprecedented, as further mentioned on Ndtv.com
Miss Lovely featuring Nawazuddin Siddiqui and Niharika Singh made headlines when it was sent to the Censor Board for certification. Looking at the adult and explicit content in the film, the CBFC proposed to make 157 cuts to the film, according to a report in Times of India. However, during the course of the year, the Board toned down their diktat and in turn passed the film with an 'A' certificate with just four cuts. Filmmaker Ashim Ahluwalia, whose film got critical acclaim internationally, was unsure if it would release in India looking at its content.
MSG: The Messenger of God According to a report in Mumbai Mirror, the CBFC revising committee has denied the release of MSG: The Messenger of God citing the reason that it might create law and order issues. Featuring a 'rockstar baba,' the film's trailer received over a million hits on video sharing websites but the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has refused to clear the film. Confirming the news, CBFC member Nandini Sardesai told Mirror, "All seven members agreed that in its entirety, this film cannot be shown as it not only promotes blind faith and superstition, but also hurts religious sentiments and could cause communal problems."
Poshter Boyz Actor-producer Shreyas Talpade's film Poshter Boyz which talks about vasectomy made headlines when the film was passed with a U/A certificate by the Censor Board without suggesting a single cut. Shreyas, in an interview to Times of India, said that his film had no vulgar content and utmost care had been taken about the kind of humour incorporated in it and about the language used. While the edgy subject of the film may have raised eyebrows, the Censor Board cleared the air and gave the film a U/A rating.
Ragini MMS 2 Sunny Leone's Ragini MMS 2 aimed at spicing up things for cine goers with its bold content. However, the makers had to dilute the tone and content of the film after the Censor Board asked them to make certain edits before its release. Ekta Kapoor's film was asked to make three important cuts in the story. A Mumbai Mirror report explains the three scenes that were asked to be edited from the film. In one particular scene, the lead pair go to a bungalow for the weekend. In this scene, the hero talks about the after effects of an aphrodisiac, which the Censor Board found too explicit. There is another scene in the movie where the lead pair talk about male and female genitals and this too was apparently saucy for the audiences. Another scene that was asked to be edited was when the male protagonist suggests that his girlfriend indulge in oral sex.
Sorry Musician Mihir Joshi's song 'Sorry' was in trouble with the Censor Board for using the word 'Bombay' in the lyrics, following which it had to beeped out. And now according to a report on Mid-day.com, the Censor Board seems to have planned to put a blanket ban on the word 'Bombay' and has also informed the producer's associations to not accept registrations for film titles, lyrics or dialogues containing 'Bombay.' The Mid-day report further quoted a source saying that they were following the guidelines from 1996 gazette which stated to restore the city's name as Mumbai.
The Xpose Himesh Reshammiya's The Xpose made headlines for various reasons and one of them was its tussle with the Censor Board. The CBFC made an objection to Sonali Raut's skin show in the film. The scene which is a tribute to Raj Kapoor's Satyam Shivam Sundaram, shows Sonali in a wet white saree recreating Zeenat Aman's iconic scene from the original. While it was shown in the film's trailer, the CBFC asked the makers to delete it from the film. Another scene where actor Zoya Afroz is running on the beach wearing a bikini, did not go down too well with the CBFC. The makers were once again asked to blur the actress' cleavage in this scene. According to a Times of India report, another scene where a brand name was used prominently was also asked to be blurred.
Ugly Anurag Kashyap won his long-standing battle with the censor board with the release of his dark thriller Ugly. Having said that, the filmmaker has also found a supporter in Farhan Akhtar as he joins Anurag in his fight against the practice of inserting anti-smoking disclaimers into films, arguing that it's just a distraction, not effective messaging, reports Mumbai Mirror. For over a year, Anurag Kashyap had delayed the release of Ugly, refusing to carry the mandatory anti-smoking disclaimer whenever a cigarette was seen smouldering on screen. Anurag is determined to continue with his fight and refuses to watch his film in the theatres, saying that the disclaimer would make him feel insulted and cheated, the report states. “We all are in agreement that smoking is injurious to health. But is running a disclaimer as a sub-title during a scene the solution to the problem? The answer is 'no'," Farhan told Mirror. In his petition submitted in the Bombay High Court, Anurag argued that the disclaimer restrains a filmmaker's constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression.
2011: Fear of breach of peace
Aarakshan's Screening stopped
Supreme Court lifts ban on 'Aarakshan' in Uttar Pradesh
TNN & Agencies | Aug 19, 2011, 02.53PM IST
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday set aside Uttar Pradesh government's decision to suspend the screening of filmmaker Prakash Jha's " Aarakshan".
The court said the UP government had no powers to suspend screening of the film on the ground that it may cause breach of peace.
An apex court bench of Justice M Sharma and Justice Anil R Dave said the state government cannot seek deletion of certain potions of the film as this amounted to censorship.
The court said once the Central Board of Film Certification cleared the public screening of a film, no state government can raise objections on its content.
Referring to the Uttar Pradesh government's contention that reservation was a very delicate issue and certain scenes in "Aarakshan" had the potential of affecting the law and order situation, the court said it could not agree with this as the film is being shown all over the country, including in the states which are sensitive to reservation.
"Aarakshan", starring Amitabh Bachchan, Saif Ali Khan and Deepika Padukone, deals with caste-based reservations in the Indian education system.
2012-14: Adults only films
The Times of India, Aug 03 2015
Himanshi Dhawan
Number of `adult' films trimmed for TV goes up
The number of adult films subject to the censor board's scissors to make them fit for TVhas steadily increased in the last three years. While 249 films with adult (A) certification were re-examined and given UA certificate in 2012, the number went up to 276 in 2013 and 284 in 2014. About 1,400 films have been certified by the Censor Board since January this year of which 189 adult films were given UA certificate. Since there is a ban on adult content on TV , films need to qualify as UA to be shown on cable TV . UA certificate means that under-12s require adult supervision as some scenes may be unsuitable for them.Most Bollywood producers vie for a it as TV rights constitute alarge source of revenue.
There is nothing in the Cinematograph Act, 1952 or the CBFC guidelines regarding re-certification, yet it is a “facility provided since the early 1990s. Since censor board chairperson Pahlaj Nihalani took charge in Ja nuary , filmmakers feel the adult certification has been handed out all too easily.They have been asked to remove words like lesbian, Bombay , saala, if they wanted a UA certification.
Certification for TV hit a controversy recently when a CAG report pointed out that the censor board had reclassified 172 adult-rated movies as general category films over the past three years without following its own rules.
In an RTI plea to Punebased Vihar Durve, the CBFC said 172 `A' films had been re-certified between October 2012 and March 2015 as `UA' without following set procedure.
2013-2014: Some prominent cuts
The Times of India, Dec 03 2015
I&B lists cuts in 40 films to show up `sanskari' UPA
I&B ministry sources said the CBFC had imposed cuts on nudity, intimate scenes and cuss words in 2013-2014 before the present board was appointed by the BJP government. Cuss words, intimate scenes nudity were chopped off from several films like Murder 3 Ghanchakkar, Megamind, Ro bocop, Queen, Ragini MMS 2 Hate Story 2, Humpty Sharma Ki Dulhania, Highway among a series of others, officials said.
The Central Board of Film Certification’s view
FILM CENSORSHIP: WHAT EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW
By CBFC India
Introduction
India has more than 13,000 cinema houses Every two months, an audience as large as India’s entire population floc ks to its cinema houses. •
Freedom of Speech and Expression
India has a free press and the same freedom appl ies to cinema, which is free enterprise and outside the control of Government ex cept the Films Division and the Doordarshan which are aimed at educating and inform ing the public, while entertaining them.
However, neither cinema nor press is separately listed in the Constitution, although freedom is a constitutional right. This i s because press and cinema fall under the Fundamental Rights chapter of the Constitution, particularly Article 19(1)(a) which says that all persons shall have “freedom of speech and expression”. The freedom of expression means the right to express one’s opinion by word of mouth, writing, printing, picture or any other manner, including movies. 1 But this right is subject to “reasonable restric tion” on grounds set out under Article 19(2) of the Constitution. The reasonable limitations can be put in the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the securit y of the State, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality o r in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.
Thus, the framers of the Indian Constitution fel t it essential to put certain reasonable restrictions in the larger interest of t he community and the country and strike a proper balance between the liberty guaranteed and he social interests specified in Article 19(2). Furthermore, it is the duty of the State to protect the freedom of expression since it is a liberty guaranteed by the Constitution.
The Supreme Court in a judgement said that film censorship becomes necessary because a film motivates though a nd action and assures a high degree of attention and retention as compared to th e printed word. The combination of act and speech, sight and sound in semi-darkness of the theatre with elimination of all distracting ideas will have a strong impact on the minds of the viewers and can affect emotions. Therefore, it has as much potential for evil as it has for good and has an equal potential to instill or cultivate violent or good behavior. It cannot be equated with other modes of communication. Censorship by prior restraint is, therefore, not only desirable but also necessary.
Film Censorship in India
The Cinematograph Act, 1952 (Act 37 of 1952), ap art from including provisions relating to Constitution and functioning of the CBFC or the Central Board of Film Certification (then called the Central Board o f Film Censors), also lays down the guidelines to be followed by certifying films. Ini tially, there were only two categories of certificate – “U” (unrestricted public exhibition) and “A” (restricted to adult audiences),
Two other categories were added in June, 1983 – “UA” (unrestricted public exhibition subject to parental guidance for children below the age of twelve) and “S” (restricted to specialized audiences such as doctors). The 1952 A ct has been amended to bring uptodate and the last amendments were in 1981 to 19 84.
The present censorship of films is governed by t he 1952 Act, the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules promulgated in 1983 and the Guidelines issued from time to time, the latest having been issued on December 6, 1991. The Guidelines are issued under section 5B of the Act, which says that “a film shall not be certified for public exhibition, if, in the opinion of the author ity competent to grant the certificate, the film or any part of it is against the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the States, friendly relations with for eign State, public order, decency or morality or involves defamation or contempt of cour t or is likely to incite the commission of any offence”.
Who implements Film Censorship?
The CBFC or the Central Board of Film Certificat ion (known till June 1, 1983 as the Central Board of Film Censors) was set up in Mumbai, initially with regional offices at Mumbai, Chennai and Calcutta. At presen t there are nine such offices based at Mumbai, Chennai, Calcutta, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Thiruvananthapuram, Delhi, Cuttack and Guwahati.
Then there is a Film Certification Appellate Tri bunal (FCAT) which has been constituted under section 5D of the 1952 Act for he aring appeals against any order of the CBFC. This tribunal is based in New Delhi.
While the work of certification of films is a Ce ntral subject, the States have to enforce the penal provisions of the 1952 Act and br ing the offenders to book.
The organizational structure of the CBFC is base d on the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Cert ification) Rules, 1983. The Board consists of a Chairperson and not less than t welve and not more than twenty-five other members appointed by the Central Government. They are appointed for a period not exceeding three years. They are eminent person s from different walks of life such as social sciences, law, education, art, film and s o on, thus representing a cross-section of society.
The CBFC is assisted by advisory panels in the r egional offices each of which is headed by a regional officer and the members of these panels are also representative of a cross-section of society and interests. These members will hold office for a period not exceeding two years. However, members can be r e-appointed.
The CBFC has divided itself into Examining and R evising Committees to provide a two-tier jury system for certification of films. In the event of a difference of opinion in the Examining Committee or the applicant not being satisfied with the decision of the Examining Committee, the Chairperson can ref er the film to a Revising Committee.
The Certification rules also apply to foreign fi lms imported into India, dubbed films and video films. In the case of dubbed films , the CBFC does not have any fresh censorship for the visual in general cases. The ce rtification does not apply to films made specifically for Doorsdarshan, since Doordarsh an programmes have been exempted from the censorship provisions and Doordar shan has its own system of examining such films.
What Guides the CBFC in its Decisions?
6.1 Section 5B(2) of the 1952 Act lays down that, in addition to the general guideline laid down in Section 5B(1), the Governmen t may issue “such directions as it may think fit setting out the principles which shal l guide the authority competent to grant certificates under this Act in sanctioning films fo r public exhibition”.
These directions, commonly understood as a guide lines, have been issued by the Government and have also been amended from t ime to time, keeping in mind the changes in social outlook from time to time and als o the kind of films being made. The revised Guidelines issued on December 6, 1991 a nd updated till Sept., 15, 1997 state as under: • The objectives of film certification will be to ens ure that – • The medium of film remains responsible and sensitiv e to the values and standards of society; • Artistic expression and creative freedom are not un duly curbed; • Certification is responsive to social changes; • The medium of film provides clean and healthy enter tainment; and
• As far as possible, the film is of aesthetic value and cinematically of a good standard. • In pursuance of the above objectives, the Board of Film Certification shall ensure that – • Anti-social activities such as violence are not glo rified or justified; • The modus-operandi of criminals, other visuals or w ords likely to incite the commission of any offence are not depicted; • Scenes – • Showing involvement of children in violence as vict ims or perpetrators or as forced witnesses to violence, or showing children a s being subjected to any form of child abuse; • Showing abuse or ridicule or physically and mentall y handicapped persons; and • Showing cruelty to, or abuse of animals, are not pr esented needlessly; • Pointless or avoidable scenes of violence, cruelty and horror, scenes or violence primarily intended to provide entertainment and suc h scenes as may have the effect of desensitizing or dehumanizing people are not shown; • Scenes which have the effect of justifying or glori fying drinking are not shown; • Scenes tendering to encourage, justify or glamorize drug addiction are not shown; Scenes tendering to encourage, justify or glamorize consumption of tobacco or smoking are not shown • Human sensibilities are not offended by vulgarity, obscenity or depravity; • Such dual meaning words as obviously cater to baser instincts are not allowed; • Scenes degrading or denigrating women in any manner are not presented; • Scenes involving sexual violence against women like attempt to rape, rape or any form of molestation, or scenes of a similar nature are avoided, and if any, such incident is germane to the theme, they shall be red uced to the minimum and no details are shown; • Scenes showing sexual perversions shall be avoided and if such matters are germane to the theme, they shall be reduced to the minimum and no details are shown; • Visuals or words contemptuous of racial, religious or other groups are not presented; • Visuals or words which promote communal, obscuranti st, anti-scientific and anti- national attitudes are not presented; • The sovereignty and integrity of India is not calle d in question; • The security of the State is not jeopardized or end angered; • Friendly relations with foreign States are not stra ined; • Public order is not endangered; • Visuals or words involving defamation of an individ ual or a body of individuals, or contempt of court are not presented;
Explanation: Scenes that tend to create scorn, disgr ace or disregard of rules or undermine the dignity of court will come u nder the term “contempt of court”, and • National symbols and emblems are not shown except i n accordance with the provisions of the Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act, 1950 (12 of 1950). • The Board of Film Certification shall also ensure t hat the film • Is judged in its entirety from the point of view of its overall impact; and • Is examined in the light of the period depicted in the films and the contemporary standards of the country and the people to which th e film relates provided that the film does not deprave the morality of the audience. • Films that meet the above – mentioned criteria but are considered unsuitable for exhibition to non-adults shall be certified for exh ibition to adult audiences only. • (i) While certifying films for unrestricted public e xhibition, the Board shall ensure that the film is suitable for family viewing, that is to say, the film shall be such that all the members of the family including children can vi ew it together. (ii) If the Board, having regard to the nature, co ntent and theme of the film is of the opinion that it is necessary to caution the parents / guardian to consider as to whether any child below the age of twelve years maybe allowed t o see such a film, the film shall be certified for unrestricted public exhibition with a n endorsement to that effect. • If the Board having regard to the nature, content a nd theme of the film, is of the opinion that the exhibition of the film should be r estricted to members of any profession or any class of persons, the film shall be certified for public exhibition restricted to the specialized audiences to be specified by the Board in this behalf. • The Board shall scrutinize the titles of the films carefully and ensure that they are not provocative, vulgar, offensive or violative of any of the above-mentioned guidelines.
The process of certification
The Cinematograph (Certification) rules, 1983 ha ve laid down the procedure that a producer must go through to get his film or vide fi lm certified, explicity stating the steps he has to undergo and also the fees he has to pay and other materials he should submit.
The film or video film and other material specif ied in rule 2.1 have to be submitted to the regional officer of the concerned regional cent re. On receipt of all the film materials, requisite fees and written matter required under th e rules, the regional officer will form an Examining Committee to view the film. Under rule 2 2, this Examining Committee, in the case of a short film, will consist of an officer of the CBFC and one advisory panel member either of whom shall be a woman, and in the case of a long film / feature film, one of whom two persons hall be women. After the film has been previewed, the CBFC has to ensure that each member gives a report in writing about hi s recommendations about the deletions and / or modifications and the certificate the film should be given. The report is then given to the Chairman who will ask the regional officer t o initiate further procedures.
However, if the Chairman, on his own motion or o n the request of the applicant, so feels, he may refer the film to Revising Committee under Rule 24. The Revising Committee will consist of Chairman, in his absence, a board m ember and not more than nine members, drawn either from the CBFC or the advisory panel, p rovided none of them was on the Examining Committee. The Revising Committee will v iew the same film print shown to the Examining Committee without any changes, and each m ember will be required to record his verdict before leaving the theatre. If the Chairma n is no in agreement with the majority view, he may direct another Revising Committee to see the film. The quorum of the Revising Committee shall be five members of whom atleast two persons shall be women: Provided that the number of women members shall not be less than one-half of the total members of a committee constituted under sub-rule (2).
After the applicant in apprised of the decision of the Board, he will delete any portions (if so directed) and submit them to the re gional officer, along with one copy of the film as certified.
Before any order prejudicially affecting the app licant of a film is passed by the Board, he is given an opportunity to represent his views i n the matter.
If the matter goes in appeal under section 5C of the 1952 Act to the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal which is headed by a retired jud ge as chairman and not more than four other members, the FCAT may hear both the applicant and he CBFC before coming to its judgement.
Censorship Violations
As stated before the Central Board of Film Certi fication is responsible for certifying films for public exhibition. However, e nforcement of the penal provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 is the State Governments/ U nion Territory Administrations, since exhibition of films is a State subject.
There are various forms of violations which ofte n go unchecked because there are no checks and no complaints from either t he law enforcement agencies or members of the public.
The following are the major violations that agit ate the minds of the public:
(a) exhibition of an “A” certificate film to a non-a dult.
(b) exhibition of an “S” certificate film to persons other than those for whom it is meant;
(c) exhibition of a film in a form other than the on e in which it was certified. Such violations are known as interpolat ions. Interpolations can be described as follows:
(i) re-insertion in prints of a film for exhibition those portions which were deleted by the Board before certificatio n of the film;
(ii) insertion in prints of a film portions which we re never shown to the Board for certification.
(iii) exhibition of ‘bits’ unconnected with the cert ified film.
(d) exhibition of a film which was refused a certifi cate (or ‘banned’ in common parlance)
(e) exhibition of uncensored films with forged certi ficates of other films.
(f) exhibition of films without censor certificates.
Film Posters
Another violation that has often come to light i s that the theatres often display obscene and indecent film posters. The 1952 Act do es not cover posters or film advertisements and these come under the common law of the land relating to obscenity, particularly section 292 of the Indian Penal code. Furthermore, this issue comes within the purview of the State Governments and Union Terr itory Administrations, particularly their law enforcing agencies including Police.
There are Central / State legislations that cove r this aspect. The Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 is administered by the Department of Women and Child Development in the Ministry of Huma n Resource Development, but the responsibility of enforcement is, again, with t he local authorities. The West Bengal Government have enacted the “West Bengal (Compulsor y Censorship of Film Publicity Materials) Act, 1974” to deal with obscene and inde cent posters.
After discussions with the film industry represe ntatives, it was decided that the film industry would deal with this matter on it s own. Thus, the Film Publicity Screening Committee was formed with headquarters at Bombay and regional chapters at Bangalore, Hyderabad, Madras and Thiruvananthapu ram. The committee, which began its work in April 1990, screens film posters and other publicity material for obscenity and depiction of women in a derogatory m anner or highlighting violence.
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has decided to watch this situation for the time being to see if it works satisfactorily.
Government’s rights
Under section 5E of the 1952 Act, the Central G overnment can suspend a certificate granted to any film for a fixed period or even revo ke it if the film is being shown in a form other than the one in which it was certified. The applicant of the certificate will have a right to appeal / review of the order under section 5F.
Under section 6 of the 1952 Act, the Government has also revisional powers to deal with errant cases. According to this the Governmen t on its own can call for the record of proceeding of the CBFC with regard to any film and pass such orders as deemed fit which include suspension of the certificate granted to th e film or its revocation or alteration of certificate with or without further deletions or or dering further deletions.
Penalties and Violations
Offences with regard to violations of censorshi p provisions are cognizable. Furthermore, they are non-bailable.
Section 7 of the1952 Act provides that if there is violation of censorship provisions or if there are interpolations or tampering of certifi ed films or if non-certified films are exhibited, or where films meant for adult audience are shown t o non-adults or where an “S” certificate film is shown to persons other than those for whom it is meant, then penalties specified therein can be imposed. Penalty can also be impose d for failure to comply with section 6A which required that any person delivering a film to an exhibitor or a distributor will also give to him details of all cuts, certification, title, l ength and conditions of certification.
Under section 7, a person guilty of violation i s punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine which may extend to Rs. 1 lakh or with both, and with a further fine upto Rs. 20,000/- for each day for a continuing offence.
Showing of video films which violate the rules in the manner prescribed in this section will attract imprisonment of not less than three months but which may extend to three years and a fine of not less than Rs. 20,000/ - but which may extend to Rs. 1 lakh and a further upto Rs. 20,000/- for each day for a cont inuing offence.
Furthermore, the trial court can direct that th e offending film be forfeited to the Government. Under section 7A, any police officer c an enter a hall where an offending film is being screened, search the premises and seized the print.
What the public should do
Under rule 30(3) of the Cinematograph (Certific ation) Rules, 1983 every cinema has to display prominently the certificate issued to th e film being shown as also the cuts or changes directed by the CBFC.
Therefore, whenever any person seeing a film fi nds any scene which he feels should have been permitted or which he suspects has been i nterpolated, he can compare that scene he has seen with the certificate and details of deletions displayed by the cinema owner.
If he finds that the film is violating any of t he certification conditions, he will have to bring it to the attention of the police, which can register a First Information Report under Section 7 of the 1952 Act.
After filing such a report, the police officer can immediately start investigating it and under the powers vested in him under section 7A, if he is prima facie satisfied that there has been violation, he can seize the print and take it to the CBFC for verification.
Since a copy of every film as certified and als o all the deleted portions have to be deposited with the CBFC at the time of certificatio n, the regional officer of the CBFC in the time of certification, the regional officer of the CBFC in the presence of a Special Executive Magistrate will examine the seized print with the c opy lying with CBFC. The Magistrate will then make his report, on the basis of which prosecu tion under section 7 can be launched after completion of formalities.
