A Division Bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Neela Gokhale, whereas listening to a petition filed by Samrat Cinematics India Pvt. Ltd, expressed displeasure over the delay in certification and questioned the board’s failure to behave inside the prescribed timelines underneath the Cinematograph Act and the brand new Certification Rules, 2024.
The filmmakers moved the High Court alleging “arbitrary and unexplained” inaction by the CBFC although the applying for certification of the movie ‘Ajey: The Untold Story of a Yogi’ in addition to its teaser, trailer and promotional tune was made on June 5. The movie, impressed by the guide ‘The Monk Who Became Chief Minister’, is scheduled for launch on August 1.
Representing the petitioner, senior advocate Ravi Kadam identified the CBFC’s purported demand for a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister’s Office, asserting that there isn’t any point out of such a requirement within the Cinematograph Act, 1952 or the Certification Rules, 2024.
The CBFC’s counsel submitted to the Bench that they may take into account the applying inside two working days and talk the identical, on the identical day or the following day.
The court docket recorded the submission and noticed, “The petitioner basically seeks path from CBFC to resolve certification inside a interval not exceeding 5 days. A letter despatched to applicant intimating the identical is taken on report. In view of the assertion that the method will probably be accomplished and the applying will probably be determined, nothing survives within the petition. The determination taken by the CBFC must be intimated on the identical day. Petition is disposed of.”
The petitioners stated they initially submitted their utility for certification on June 5. Under Rule 37 of the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 2024, the CBFC is obligated to look at the applying inside seven days and schedule a screening inside 15 days. However, no motion was taken for almost a month, prompting additional steps from the petitioners.
On July 3, following recommendation from CBFC officers, the filmmakers re-applied underneath the ‘precedence scheme’ and paid thrice the same old charge as stipulated underneath Rule 33(2). Although a screening was slated for July 7, it was cancelled abruptly a day earlier than, with no rationalization or follow-up communication.
When the filmmakers checked the applying standing on July 12, they discovered it marked as “Incomplete” with an unclear instruction to “Provide Documentary Evidence”, with none specifics on what paperwork had been required.
The petition alleged that the CBFC’s conduct was arbitrary and had resulted in critical industrial and reputational injury, particularly with the movie’s August 1 launch date looming.
The filmmakers additionally identified that the movie attracts inspiration from the extensively circulated 2017 guide ‘The Monk Who Became Chief Minister’ by Shantanu Gupta, which has been translated into 12 languages and is publicly out there. The petition famous that the guide had acquired an official endorsement from the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister’s Office and that the movie affords a respectful and fact-based depiction of the Chief Minister’s public life.
Arguing that the CBFC’s delays and opaque conduct infringed upon their constitutional rights, the petitioners invoked Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution, citing violations of their rights to equality, free speech, occupation, and private liberty.
Published – July 17, 2025 10:42 pm IST
