The Bengal Files Screening: "No State Ban Imposed in West Bengal", notes Calcutta HC while dismissing PIL
Calcutta High Court refused to entertain a PIL on the film ‘Bengal Files’, but highlighted Advocate General’s assurance that West Bengal Govt had not imposed any ban on its screening
No Ban on ‘Bengal Files’ in West Bengal, Says State; Calcutta HC Dismisses PIL
The Calcutta High Court on Friday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to ensure screening of the film “Bengal Files” in West Bengal, while clarifying that the State government has not imposed any ban or prohibition, direct or indirect, on the movie.
The Bench of Justice Sujoy Pal and Justice Smita Das De observed, "The PIL at the behest of the present petitioner cannot be entertained. However, learned Advocate General clearly stated that State has not imposed any ban or prohibition directly or indirectly for screening of the said film."
The PIL was filed by a petitioner describing himself as a social worker and youth activist, who alleged that theatres in West Bengal were not screening the film due to unofficial pressure from State authorities. He contended that although the film was being exhibited across the country, audiences in West Bengal were being deprived of the chance to view it.
During the proceedings, the Advocate General Kishore Datta questioned the maintainability of the PIL, arguing that only the film’s producers, distributors, or exhibitors could raise such a grievance. He stressed that “PIL is not a pill for all diseases” and noted that the aggrieved parties were financially capable of pursuing remedies themselves.
The Court accepted the State’s stand, holding that the PIL could not be entertained at the behest of the petitioner, but made it clear that there was no official or unofficial ban imposed by the West Bengal government.
At the same time, the Bench observed that the producers or distributors of the film remained free to approach the appropriate forum if they had any grievance.
Thus, while rejecting the PIL, the Court underscored that the State had not restricted the exhibition of “Bengal Files”, leaving the onus on the filmmakers to assert their rights.
Advocates Shoumendu Mukherji, Nikunj Berlia, Megha Sharma, Aniruddha Ghosh, and Urvashi appeared for the Petitioner.
Notably, on September 23, the Court had questioned whether media reports indicating a special screening in Kolkata could be relied upon and asked whether there was evidence of threats to cinema hall owners from the State.
Petitioners had relied on a public statement by the film’s director Vivek Agnihotri, alleging intimidation of exhibitors despite the nationwide release on September 5. When pressed by the Court, the State Counsel had admitted he had no instructions on whether the movie had been screened anywhere in West Bengal.
The Court had directed the State to obtain instructions and fixed the matter for September 26, refusing the State’s request to push it beyond the Puja vacations. The Bench had underscored that issues concerning film releases are time-sensitive, observing that “every week new movies are releasing” and such matters cannot be delayed.
The PIL has been filed by Sayan Kansabanik, a resident of Nadia, West Bengal, through Advocates Shoumendu Mukherji and Nikunj Berlia. The petition alleges that although there is no official notification, order, or ban issued by the State Government, the film has not been allowed to be released in West Bengal. This amounts to a de facto restriction that is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of the citizens’ fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India, the plea contends.
The petitioner asserts that as a citizen, he has a fundamental right to view a lawfully certified film. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has already cleared Bengal Files, and the film is being screened smoothly in theatres across the country except in West Bengal. The non-release in the State, despite the absence of any formal prohibition, is argued to be an unjustified suppression of artistic expression and an infringement of the constitutional right of the public to access the work.
The petition further relies on a series of Supreme Court precedents which have categorically held that once a film has been certified by the CBFC, it is entitled to free and unobstructed exhibition. The Apex Court has also clarified that apprehensions of law-and-order disturbances cannot be cited by the State as a justification to prevent the release of a certified film. Instead, the State has a constitutional duty to maintain law and order and to safeguard the rights of filmmakers, theatre owners, and audiences.
Highlighting this constitutional obligation, the petitioner contends that the State cannot resort to extra-constitutional methods to obstruct the screening of Bengal Files. Rather, it is duty-bound to ensure adequate protection to theatres and citizens who wish to watch the film, instead of indirectly curtailing its release through inaction.
The PIL, therefore, prays for appropriate directions to the Government of West Bengal to ensure that Bengal Files is released in theatres across the State without delay, thereby restoring and safeguarding the constitutional rights of citizens under Part III of the Constitution.
Case Title: Sayan Kansabanik v. State of West Bengal
Order Date: September 26, 2025
Bench: Justice Sujoy Pal and Justice Smita Das De