Read Time: 07 minutes
The PILs challenge the film as being made in an attempt to tarnish the image of Sikh Community by showcasing demands for Khalistan among other contentious dialogues
Two Public Interest Litigations (PILs) challenging actor Kangana Ranaut's upcoming movie ‘Emergency’ have been filed simultaneously in both the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court. The petitions allege that the film portrays Sikhs in a negative light, raising concerns about potential violations of the Cinematograph Act.
On Monday, the Madhya Pradesh High Court issued notices to the Central government and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) in response to a PIL filed by Jabalpur Sikh Sangat and Guru Singh Sabha Indore. The petitioners, represented by Advocate Narinder Pal Singh Ruprah, argued that the film’s trailer shows Amritdari Sikhs as violent and includes a dialogue suggesting a demand for Khalistan. This, they claimed, could lead to stigmatisation and harassment of Sikh children and misrepresent the Sikh community’s historical contributions to India. The petitioners highlighted that the community has historically been integral to India’s unity and defence. The petitioners cited the Sikhs' contribution to the Indian Army and their involvement in humanitarian efforts, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic when they were at the forefront of providing food, shelter, and oxygen to those in need.
The Division Bench, comprising Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf, questioned whether the film had been certified by the CBFC and referenced a recent submission by the Central government before the Punjab & Haryana High Court, indicating that the movie had not yet received certification. Justice Sachdeva remarked on the possibility that the film might not be released on its scheduled date, which is September 6, 2024, if the CBFC finds scenes that require editing or deletion after a thorough review.
Despite acknowledging the concerns raised by the petitioners, the Court noted that it had not seen the trailer and that sometimes trailers do not accurately represent the entire film. However, the Bench recognised the need for a prompt review of the matter and scheduled an urgent hearing for the next day, with notices to be issued to the filmmakers and other respondents.
Meanwhile, the Punjab & Haryana High Court had already engaged with a similar PIL on August 31, 2024. The Division Bench, composed of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Anil Kshetarpal, heard the petition, which also alleged that ‘Emergency’ contained scenes that could incite animosity against the Sikh community. The Centre, represented by the Additional Solicitor General of India, assured the Court that the film had not yet been certified by the CBFC. The government emphasised that all necessary precautions, including adherence to guidelines protecting the sovereignty and integrity of India, public order, and communal harmony, would be followed during the certification process.
The Punjab & Haryana High Court, while acknowledging the Centre's assurances, observed that any aggrieved party could approach the CBFC’s Revising Committee for a review of the certification decision if necessary. The Court thus opted not to issue notices in the case, instead advising the petitioners to utilise the remedies available under the Cinematograph Act, 1952, and the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983.
Cause Titles : Jabalpur Sikh Sangat and Others v Union of India and Others [WP-25911-2024] & Gurinder Singh and another v Union of India and others [CWP-PIL-179-2024]
Please Login or Register
