PRECENSORSHIP IN THE FILMS WITH REFERENCE TO

THE CINEMATOGRAPHY ACT,1952

SUBMITTED TO: Ms. KRITIKA SUBMITTED BY: APALI

ROLL NO. 308/14

Bcom. LLB (H)

SECTION: C

1
ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I have taken efforts in this project. However, it would not have been possible
without the kind support and help of many individuals and organizations. I
would like to extend my sincere thanks to all of them.

I am highly indebted to Mrs. Kritika Ma’am for her guidance and constant
supervision as well as for providing necessary information regarding the project
& also for their support in completing the project.

I would like to express my gratitude towards my parents & member of UILS for
their kind co-operation and encouragement which help me in completion of this
project.

My thanks and appreciations also go to my mates in developing the project and

people who have willingly helped me out with their abilities.

2
INTRODUCTION

The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) (often referred to as the Censor Board) is a
statutory censorship and classification body under the Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting, Government of India. It is tasked with "regulating the public exhibition of films
under the provisions of the Cinematograph Act 1952". Films can be publicly exhibited in India
only after they are certified by the Board, including films shown on television. CBFC India is
considered to be one of the most powerful film censor boards in the world due to its strict ways
of functioning.

Though the first film in India (Raja Harishchandra) was produced in 1913 by Dadasaheb Phalke,
but the Indian Cinematograph Act was passed and came into effect only in 1920. Censor
Boards (as they were called then) were placed under police chiefs in cities of Madras
(now Chennai), Bombay (now Mumbai), Calcutta (now Kolkata), Lahore (now in Pakistan) and
Rangoon (now Yangon in Burma). Regional censors were independent.
After Independence autonomy of regional censors was abolished and they were brought under
the Bombay Board of Film Censors. With implementation of Cinematograph Act, 1952 the board
was unified and reconstituted, as the Central Board of Film Censors

The 1952 Act has been amended to bring upto date and the last amendments were in 1981 to
1984. The present censorship of films is governed by the 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 authority 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 foreign State, public order, decency or morality or involves defamation or
contempt of court or is likely to incite the commission of any offence”

3
According to the Section 5A of the Cinematography Act, 1952 after the examination of the films
the censorship of films is classified into 4 categories;

1. U (Unrestricted Public Exhibition)

Films with the U certification are fit for unrestricted public exhibition, and are family friendly.
These films can contain universal themes like education, family, drama, romance, sci-fi, action
etc. Now, these films can also contain some mild violence, but it should not be prolonged. It may
also contain very mild sexual scenes (without any traces of nudity or sexual detail).

2. U/A (Parental Guidance for children below the age of 12 years)

Films with the U/A certification can contain moderate adult themes, that are not strong in nature
and can be watched by a child under parental guidance. These films can contain some strong
violence, moderate sex (without any traces of nudity or sexual detail), frightening scenes and
muted abusive and filthy language.

3. A (Restricted to adults)
Films with the A certification are available for public exhibition, but with restriction to adults.
These films can contain heavily strong violence, strong sex (but full frontal and rear nudity is not
allowed usually), strong abusive language (but words which insults or degrades women are not
allowed), and even some controversial and adult themes considered unsuitable for young
viewers. Such films are often recertified for TV and video viewing, which doesn't happen in case
of U and U/A certified movies.

4. S (Restricted to any special class of persons)

Films with S certification should not be viewed by the public. Only people associated with it
(Engineers, Doctors, Scientists, etc.), have permission to watch those films.
Additionally, V/U, V/UA, V/A are used for video releases with U, U/A and A carrying the same
meaning as above.

5. Refusal to certify.
In addition to the certifications above there is also the possibility of the board refusing to certify
the film at all.

4
According to Section 3 of the Cinematography Act, 1952, the board of the film certification
should consist of:

1. 25 other non-official members and a Chairperson (all of whom are appointed by Central
Government.(other members not less than 12 and not more than 25)
 Current chairman of the board is Prasoon Joshi appointed on 12th August 2017

2. Salary and allowances of the chairman will be determined by the central government and
that of the other members will be as prescribed in the meetings of the board.

3. The other terms and conditions of the board will be as prescribed by the act.

According to the Section 4 of the cinematography Act, 1952, the examination of the films will
be done in following manner:

1. Any person desiring to exhibit any film shall in the prescribed manner make an
application to the Board for a certificate in respect thereof, and the Board may, after
examining or having the film examined in the prescribed manner,

 sanction the film for unrestricted public exhibition:

 sanction the film for public exhibition restricted to adults;
 direct the applicant to carry out such excisions or modifications in the film as it
thinks necessary before sanctioning the film for public exhibition under any of the
foregoing clauses;
 refuse to sanction the film for public exhibition.

2. No action under 1 [the proviso to clause (i), clause (ii), clause (iia), clause (iii) or clause
(iv)] of sub-section (1) shall be taken by the Board except after giving an opportunity to
the applicant for representing his views in the matter.

5
The Board functions with its headquarters at Mumbai. It has nine Regional offices each at:

 Bangalore
 Chennai
 Cuttack
 Guwahati
 Hyderabad
 Kolkata
 Mumbai
 New Delhi
 Thiruvananthapuram
The Regional Offices are assisted in the examination of films by Advisory Panels. Therefore
Section 5 of the cinematography Act talks about the efficient working of the the board with the
help of the advisory board.
It states:
1. For the purpose of enabling the Board to efficiently discharge its functions under this
Act, the Central Government may establish at such regional centers as it thinks fit,
advisory panels each of which shall consist of such number of persons, being persons
qualified in the opinion of the Central Government to judge the effect of films on the
public, as the Central Government may think fit to appoint thereto.

2. At each regional center there shall be as many regional officers as the Central
Government may think fit to appoint, and rules made in this behalf may provide for the
association of regional officers in the examination of films.

3. The Board may consult in such manner as may be prescribed, any advisory panel in
respect of any film for which an application for a certificate has been made.

4. It shall be the duty of every such advisory panel whether acting as a body or in
committees as may be provided in the rules made in this behalf to examine the film and
to make such recommendations to the Board as it thinks fit.

5. The members of the advisory panel shall not be entitled to any salary but shall receive
such fees or allowances as may be prescribed.

6
Section 5A as discussed above, has many controversies involved. Some of them are:

1. In 2002, the film War and Peace, depicting scenes of nuclear testing and the September
11, 2001 attacks, created by Anand Patwardhan, was asked to make 21 cuts before it was
allowed to have the certificate for release. Patwardhan objected, saying "The cuts that
they asked for are so ridiculous that they won't hold up in court" and "But if these cuts do
make it, it will be the end of freedom of expression in the Indian media." The court
decreed the cuts unconstitutional and the film was shown uncut. The same year, Indian
filmmaker and former chief of the country's film censor board, Vijay Anand, kicked up a
controversy with a proposal to legalize the exhibition of X-rated films in selected
cinemas across the country, saying "Porn is shown everywhere in India clandestinely ...
and the best way to fight this onslaught of blue movies is to show them openly in theatres
with legally authorized licences". He resigned within a year after taking charge of the
censor board after facing widespread criticism of his moves.
2. In 2003, CBFC banned the film Gulabi Aaina (The Pink Mirror), a film on
Indian transsexuals produced and directed by Sridhar Rangayan. The censor board cited
that the film was "vulgar and offensive". The filmmaker appealed twice again
unsuccessfully. The film still remains banned in India, but has screened at numerous
festivals all over the world and won awards. The critics have applauded it for its
"sensitive and touching portrayal of marginalised community".
3. In 2004, the documentary Final Solution, which looks at religious rioting
between Hindus and Muslims, was banned. The film follows 2002 clashes in the western
state of Gujarat, which left more than 1,000 people dead. The censor board justified the
ban, saying it was "highly provocative and may trigger off unrest and communal
violence". The ban was lifted in October 2004 after a sustained campaign.
4. In 2006, seven states (Nagaland, Punjab, Goa, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh) have
banned the release or exhibition of the Hollywood movie The Da Vinci Code (and
also the book), although the CBFC cleared the film for adult viewing throughout
India. However, the respective high courts lifted the ban and the movie was shown in the
two states.
5. The CBFC demanded five cuts from the 2011 American film The Girl with the Dragon
Tattoo because of some scenes containing rape and nudity. The producers and the
director David Fincher finally decided not to release the film in India.
6. In 2013, Kamal Haasan's Vishwaroopam was banned from the screening for a period of
two weeks in Tamil Nadu.
7. In 2015, the CBFC demanded four cuts (three visual and one audio) from the art-house
Malayalam feature film Chaayam Poosiya Veedu (The Painted House) directed by
brothers Santosh Babusenan and Satish Babusenan because the film contained scenes
where the female lead was shown in the nude. The directors refused to make any changes
whatsoever to the film and hence the film was denied a certificate.

7
Chairperson of CBFC Leela Samson resigned alleging political interference after the CBFC's
rejection of a certificate for the film MSG: Messenger of God was overturned by an appellate
tribunal. She was later replaced by Pahlaj Nihalani. His appointment caused more than half the
board members to resign alleging Pahlaj Nihalani is close to the present ruling part
8. In 2016, the film Udta Punjab, produced by Anurag Kashyap and Ekta Kapoor among
others, ran into trouble with the CBFC, resulting in a very public re-examination of the
ethics of film censorship in India. The film, which depicted a structural drug problem in
the state of Punjab, used a lot of expletives and showed scenes of drug use.
The CBFC, on 9 June 2016, released a list of 94 cuts and 13 pointers, including the
deletion of names of cities in Punjab.
On 13 June, the film was cleared by the Bombay High Court with one cut and
disclaimers. The court ruled that, contrary to the claims of the CBFC, the film was not
out to "malign" the state of Punjab, and that it "wants to save people". Thereafter, the film
was faced with further controversy when a print of it was leaked online on a torrent site.
The quality of the copy, along with the fact that there was supposedly a watermark that
said "censor" on top of the screen, raised suspicions that the CBFC itself had leaked the
copy to spite the filmmakers. It also contained the only scene that had been cut according
to the High Court order. While the CBFC claimed innocence, the lingering suspicions
resulted in a tense release, with the filmmakers and countless freedom of expression
advocates taking to social media to appeal to the public to watch the film in theatres, as a
conscious challenge against excessive censorship on art in India. Kashyap himself asked
viewers to wait till the film released before they downloaded it for free, stating that he
didn't have a problem with illegal downloads,[31] an unusual thing for a film producer to
say. The film eventually released and grossed over $13 million finishing as a commercial
success.
In August 2017, soon after his removal as CBFC Chief, Nihalani revealed in an
interview that he had received instructions from the Ministry of Information and
Broadcasting to block the release of the film.
9. In 2017, the film Lipstick Under My Burkha directed by Alankrita Shrivastava and
produced by Prakash Jha, also ran into trouble with the CBFC which refused to certify
the film, stating that "The story is lady oriented, their fantasy above life. There are
contagious sexual scenes, abusive words, audio pornography and a bit sensitive touch
about one particular section of society."
Internationally, the film had been screened in over 35 film festivals across the world and
notably earned eleven international awards prior to its official release in India, becoming
an eligible entry for the Golden Globe Award Ceremony. The filmmakers appealed this
decision to the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT), which overruled the censor
board's ruling, thereby granting the film a theatrical release rights.
FCAT asked the filmmakers to make some cuts, mostly related to the sex scenes, at their
discretion. The film released with an "A" or adults certificate, equivalent to an NC-17
rating in the United States, with some voluntary edits. Shrivastava told Agence-France
Presse: "Of course I would have loved no cuts, but the FCAT has been very fair and

8
 clear. I feel that we will be able to release the film without hampering the narrative or
diluting its essence."

Section 5B: Principles of guidance in certifying films

1. A film shall not be certified for public exhibition if, in the opinion of the authority
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 State
 friendly relations with foreign States
 public order
 decency or morality
 involves defamation
 contempt of court
 is likely to incite the commission of any offence.

2. Subject to the provisions contained in sub-section (1), the Central Government may
issue such directions as it may think fit setting out the principles which shall guide the
authority competent to grant certificates under this Act in sanctioning films for public
exhibition.

Section 5C: Appeals.

1. Any person applying for a certificate in respect of a film who is aggrieved by any order
of the Board
 refusing to grant a certificate;
 granting only an “A” certificate;
 granting only a “S” certificate;
 granting only a “UA” certificate;
 directing the applicant to carry out any excisions or modifications, may, within
thirty days from the date of such order, prefer an appeal to the Tribunal

2. Every appeal under this section shall be made by a petition in writing and shall be
accompanied by a brief statement of the reasons for the order appealed against where
such statement has been furnished to the appellant and by such fees, not exceeding rupees
one thousand, as may be prescribed.

9
Section5D: Constitution of Appellate Tribunal

1. For the purpose of hearing appeals against any order of the Board under section 5C,
the Central Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute an
Appellate Tribunal.

2. The head office of the Tribunal shall be at New Delhi or at such other place as the
Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify.

3. Such Tribunal shall consist of a Chairman and not more than four other members
appointed by the Central Government

4. A person shall not be qualified for appointment as the Chairman of the Tribunal
unless he is a retired Judge of a High Court, or is a person who is qualified to be a
Judge of a High Court.

5. The Central Government may appoint such persons who, in its opinion, are qualified
to judge the effect of films on the public, to be members of the Tribunal.

6. The Chairman of the Tribunal shall receive such salary and allowances as may be
determined by the Central Government and the members shall receive such
allowances or fees as may be prescribed.

7. Subject to such rules as may be made in this behalf, the Central Government may
appoint a Secretary and such other employees as it may think necessary for the
efficient performance of the functions of the Tribunal under this Act

8. The Secretary to, and other employees of, the Tribunal shall exercise such powers and
perform such duties as may be prescribed after consultation with the Chairman of the
Tribunal.

9. The other terms and conditions of service of the Chairman and members of, and the
Secretary to, and other employees of, the Tribunal shall be such as may be prescribed.

10. Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Tribunal may regulate its own procedure.

11. The Tribunal may, after making such inquiry into the matter as it considers necessary,
and after giving the appellant and the Board an opportunity of being heard in the
matter, make such order in relation to a film as it thinks fit and the Board shall
dispose of the matter in conformity with such order.

10
5E: Suspension and revocation of certificate

1. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub section (2) of Section 6,the Central

Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, suspend a certificate granted
under this Part, for such period as it thinks fit or may revoke such certificate if it is
satisfied that
a. The film in respect of which the certificate was granted, was being exhibited in a
form other than the one in which it was certified
b. The film or any part thereof it being exhibited in contravention of the provisions of
this part rules made there under
2. Where a notification under sub-section (1) has been published, the Central Government
may require the applicant for certificate or any other person to whom the rights in the
film have passed, or both, to deliver up the certificate and all duplicate certificates, if any,
granted in respect of the film to the Board or to any person or authority specified in the
said notification.
3. No action under this section shall be taken except after giving an opportunity to the
person concerned for representing his views in the matter.
4. During the period in which a certificate remains suspended under this section, the film
shall be deemed to be an uncertified film.

5F:Review of orders by Central Government

1. Where an applicant for a certificate or any other person to whom the rights in the film
have passed, is aggrieved by any order of the Central Government under Section 5-E, he
may, within sixty days of the date of publication of the notification in the Official
Gazette, make an application to the Central Government for review of the order, setting
out in such application the grounds on which he considers such review to be necessary
The period of sixty days can be extended by providing a justifiable reason for not filing
the application within sixty days.
2. On receipt of the application under sub-section (1), the Central Government may, after
giving the aggrieved person a reasonable opportunity of being heard, and after making
such further inquiry, as it may consider necessary, pass such order as it thinks fit,
confirming, modifying or reversing its decision and the Board shall dispose of the matter
in conformity with such order.

11
NECESSITY OF FILM CENSORSHIP:

 While the media in our country are free, it is considered necessary in the general interest
to examine the product it goes out for public consumption. While there is no censorship
published material, need was felt to have censorship for films because of the effect that
the audio-visual medium can have on the people which can be far stronger than the
influence of the printed word.

 Film censorship or certification is thus the end product of the process of previewing of
film and it includes a decision either not to allow a particular film or public viewing or to
allow it for public viewing with certain deletions and / or modifications. Furthermore, it
is to ensure that the people do not get exposed to psychologically damaging matter.

 The Supreme Court in a judgement three years ago said that film censorship becomes
necessary because a film motivates though and action and assures a high degree of
attention and retention as compared to the 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.

12
CONTROVERSIES REGARDING THE CINEMATOGRAPHY ACT, 1952

Kareena Kapoor unabashedly flirts with the audience splashing around in opal green waters
playing Kaurwaki in 'Asoka: The Series' on prime time television, censor board chairman Vijay
Anand was not amused.
"The film has a parental guidance (PG) rating. Yet an international TV channel was beaming it
into drawing rooms where children can view it,'' he fumed.

The unedited five-hour footage of the historical saga shot by director Santosh Sivan was being
telecast on Star TV as a five-part series at 9 p.m. on Tuesdays. He stated that the fact that the
censor board can do little to prevent the screening of the unedited film on the international
channel has made a mockery of our role

It is loopholes like these, which the board's nine month-old chairman hopes to plug as he
prepares to revamp the Cinematography Act, 1952.
 "Why single out only the film industry? All media should be brought under the guidance
of a comprehensive regulatory body,'' he argued.
 Despite a ban on X-rated films they are freely available on CDs. What is the point in
having rules, which can be bypassed, he questioned.

The director of sensational hits like 'Guide,' 'Teesri Manzil' and 'Kora Kagaz' said the need of the
hour is to be realistic and practical. "At one time I was among those opposed to the idea of
having a censor board. However, now I feel that it is a necessity,'' he confessed. His idea of
censorship, however, is not to restrict the freedom of a filmmaker or options for the audience.

"Let an artist make the film. We'll ensure it reaches the right audience,'' he reasoned.

"We want film-makers to make films keeping the target audience in mind. If you want a
universal (U)-rating then don't have any adult scenes,'' he reasoned. Some of the
recommendations he has made to the six member government-appointed committee reviewing
the Cinematography Act include :
 encouraging self-censorship among film-makers
 streamlining procedures
 employing detective agencies to keep a check on films being screened at theatres and
making the guidelines more liberal ("why can't abusive language be used in films when
that's how everybody speaks'').

This was the first time that the entire Act was being revamped.
The grounds for such an exercise were laid when instead of bureaucrats the government
appointed film personalities like Hrishikesh Mukherjee, Shakti Samant and Asha Parekh as
chairpersons of the Board. "The challenge was to do something positive with the negative act
of censoring films,'' he said.

13
BIBLOGRAPHY

1. indiankanoon.in

2. scconline.in

3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Board_of_Film_Certification

4. http://theatreworld.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Film_censorship.pdf

5. http://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/in/in034en.pdf

6. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Cinematography-Act-set-to-
change/articleshow/13702410.cms

7. https://www.thenational.ae/arts-culture/udta-punjab-the-film-that-challenged-indian-
censorship-norms-1.179726

14