The Karnataka government’s decision to stop the release of the Hindi film, Hamare Baarah, for two weeks violates the freedom of expression in the name of upholding order and preventing communal tension.

Stopping the Release of the Hindi Film

The likelihood of protests, communal tension or prejudice to law and order ought not to be cited as a reason to suspend the screening of a film. Such a ban on public screening of films, independent of their merit, has no place in a democratic society.

• The Bombay High Court, which initially stayed the release of Hamare Baarah, has lifted the ban, following the producer’s offer to remove some controversial dialogues.
• Its observation that allowing an individual to stall the release of a certified film would encourage film producers being held to ransom is consistent with judicial precedents.
• Once it is certified by the Central Board of Film Certification, presumably after proper scrutiny of its suitability for public viewing, there ought to be no scope for a second opinion by a law enforcement authority.
• At the same time, it must also develop the resources to counter sectarian propaganda with facts and without resort to unconstitutional methods.
• The position that a work, be it a book or a play or a film, may be banned under threat of protests or likely violence has been rebuffed by the Supreme Court of India in some landmark verdicts. “… freedom of expression cannot be suppressed on account of threat of demonstration and processions or threats of violence,” the Court said in its 1989 judgment in S. Rangarajan vs P. Jagjivan Ram on the film, Ore Oru Gramathile.

Enroll now for UPSC Online Course

Conclusion

In a democracy, censorship based on potential protests undermines free expression. Judicial precedents uphold the right to screen certified films despite threats of violence.