Centre to take fresh call on Udaipur Files after Delhi High Court questions cuts

4 days ago

The Delhi High Court on Friday ordered the Central government to re-evaluate Udaipur Files, a film linked to the 2022 murder of tailor Kanhaiya Lal, after questioning whether the Centre can order edits and cuts under its revisional jurisdiction. The court instructed that the reassessment be completed by August 6, urging compliance with existing legal norms.The court's order came after the government stated it would withdraw a previous directive that had permitted the film's release with specific cuts. The court stressed the importance of adhering to the Centre's revisional jurisdiction under the Cinematograph Act, which governs the certification and release of films in India.During the court proceedings, the Additional Solicitor General (ASG), appearing for the government, said they were withdrawing the order. 'We are withdrawing only because the format has been questioned,' the ASG stated. The Centre added that it would reconsider the matter and take an appropriate decision.'To say that we recommended cuts—where do you derive this power? Where is your authority to make a recommendation to the Board to revise? Is there any authority available to you?' the court earlier asked.The court examined the Central government's jurisdiction under the Cinematograph Act, noting that it may only issue general principles under Section 5(2) of the Cinematograph Act or declare a film unfit for certification. The limitations of the government's authority were a focal point of the court's scrutiny, with an emphasis on ensuring that any action taken remained within the bounds of the Act."The only authority available to you is that you can issue general principles under Section 5(2) and the other power is sec 6(2). You can only say no, this film is unfit to be certified after consideration," the bench noted.The Delhi High Court on Friday directed all parties to submit their views to the Centre by August 4, paving the way for a timely decision ahead of the film's scheduled release on August 8.advertisementThe court instructed the revisional authorities to conclude their decision by Wednesday without any delays.
Questioning the Centre's earlier directive of suggesting six cuts to the film, Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, counsel for one of the accused in the case said, "The Central government cannot suggest cuts, modify dialogue, disclaimer, basically become film board like in this case. The Central government does not have the statutory power to become a master director of this film by saying 'remove certain dialog, remove certain disclaimers, use these words in the disclaimer, change the content of this, I'm going to make a few cuts and you release the film."- EndsMust Watch

Hashtags

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

PWD corruption case: ‘No proof' against Delhi ex-minister Satyendar Jain; court accepts CBI closure report

Time of India

27 minutes ago

Time of India

PWD corruption case: ‘No proof' against Delhi ex-minister Satyendar Jain; court accepts CBI closure report

NEW DELHI: A Delhi court on Monday accepted the closure report filed by CBI in a case registered against former Delhi minister Satyendar Jain and others over allegations of irregular engagement of professionals in the PWD and payments made from unrelated project funds. The court of special judge Dig Vinay Singh noted that despite several years of investigation, no incriminating evidence was found against anyone to support charges under the Prevention of Corruption (POC) Act, 1988, or any other offence. "When the investigating agency has not found any incriminating evidence over such a long period to prove the commission of any offence, particularly under the POC Act, 1988, further proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Not every decision made in an official capacity-that does not strictly follow rules-warrants invoking the POC Act. There must be at least some material to justify applying the provisions of the POC Act, 1988. Mere neglect of duty or improper exercise of duty alone may not constitute a violation under the POC Act," the judge said. You Can Also Check: Delhi AQI | Weather in Delhi | Bank Holidays in Delhi | Public Holidays in Delhi "It is also worth noting that, even to charge someone, mere suspicion is not enough; at least strong suspicion would be necessary to proceed," the court observed. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Is AI the secret to mastering a new language faster than ever? See why experts are buzzing. Talkpal AI Undo The FIR was registered in 2018 against Jain, who was the then PWD minister, and other PWD officials, based on a complaint from Delhi govt's directorate of vigilance. According to prosecution, Jain and PWD officials irregularly hired a 'creative team' of consultants, breaching recruitment and financial regulations. The court said CBI found no evidence of pecuniary advantage, conspiracy, or corruption, and the protest petition does not provide any sufficient prima facie evidence from investigations or otherwise, warranting further inquiry. "Since the issues relate to administrative decisions without criminal elements, and more than six years have passed, further investigation is unwarranted. CBI requests the protest petition be dismissed and the closure report accepted," the court ruled. The judge said that if any fresh material is received against anyone, CBI would be at liberty to probe the matter further. Other pending cases against Jain include CCTV project corruption case, a money laundering case and disproportionate case. In March 2025, a case was registered against Jain for allegedly accepting a Rs 7 crore bribe to waive off a penalty imposed on Bharat Electronics Ltd for delays in installing CCTV cameras in Delhi. In the money laundering case, he was arrested by ED in May 2022 for alleged money laundering. In Jan 2025, CBI informed a special court that it had secured approval from Delhi LG to prosecute Jain in a disproportionate assets case.

Pune Police claim ‘no case' under Atrocities Act, say issue resolved through dialogue

Hindustan Times

44 minutes ago

Hindustan Times

Pune Police claim ‘no case' under Atrocities Act, say issue resolved through dialogue

PUNE: The Pune police have denied allegations of caste-based abuse and assault by officers during a raid at a residence in Kothrud, even as the Congress and the Nationalist Congress Party (Sharadchandra Pawar) demanded immediate action, including the registration of a case under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Mumbai, India - June 5, 2025:NCP MP Supriya Sule addressing to media during press conference at YB Chavan center in Mumbai, India, on Thursday, June 5, 2025. (Photo by Anshuman Poyrekar/ Hindustan Times) (Hindustan Times) The controversy stems from an incident earlier this week in which three young women — social workers — accused Kothrud police personnel of forcibly entering their home, illegally detaining them, using casteist slurs, and physically assaulting them. The women alleged that the police targeted them for helping another woman in distress. The allegations triggered political reactions and protests, with Congress and NCP(SCP) accusing the Pune police of high-handedness and caste bias. Harshavardhan Sapkal, president, Maharashtra Pradesh Congress Committee, called the incident a reflection of the deteriorating law and order situation in the city. 'Police arrogance is growing, while drug rackets and gangs remain unchecked. The officers responsible for harassing these women must be booked under the Atrocities Act,' he said, questioning why an FIR had not been registered. Nationalist Congress Party (SP) MP Supriya Sule also flagged the matter, stating on social media platform X that she had received a video showing the alleged abuse. 'If the contents of the video are true, it is extremely serious. The Home Minister must take urgent cognisance,' she posted. The incident prompted protests outside the Pune Police Commissionerate late Saturday night. Among those who accompanied the women and demanded accountability was Sujat Ambedkar, son of Vanchit Bahujan Aghadi president Dr Prakash Ambedkar. He questioned the police's failure to register a case under the Atrocities Act and sought a written explanation. However, inspector Sandeep Deshmane, Kothrud Police, in a written response to the complainants, said the initial investigation did not support the version presented by the women. 'Prima facie, the facts do not fall under the scope of the Atrocities Act,' he stated. Amitesh Kumar, Pune Police Commissioner, said, 'The issue has been resolved through dialogue.' Meanwhile, Sambhaji Kadam, deputy commissioner of police (Zone III), said no case under the SC/ST Atrocities Act has been registered. Chief minister Devendra Fadnavis said, 'Instructions have been given to police not to come under any pressure and act as per the law.'

Delhi court disposes of PWD irregularities case against Satyendar Jain

Hindustan Times

an hour ago

Hindustan Times

Delhi court disposes of PWD irregularities case against Satyendar Jain

A Delhi court on Monday disposed of a corruption case against former Public Works Department (PWD) minister Satyendar Jain, of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), alleging irregularities in hiring a creative team for PWD's infrastructure projects in 2016 and causing a loss to the public exchequer. Satyendar Jain is also facing an Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) probe over an alleged ₹ 7 crore bribe from a company tasked with installing CCTV cameras in Delhi. Special judge Dig Vinay Singh, accepting the Central Bureau of Investigation's (CBI's) closure report filed in 2022, said, 'When CBI could not find any evidence of criminal conspiracy, abuse of power, pecuniary gain, or wrongful loss to the government exchequer, and the alleged acts are at most administrative irregularities, no offence under Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act or criminal conspiracy is established.' The court noted that despite several years of investigation carried out by the probe agency, no incriminating evidence has been found. 'Not every decision made in an official capacity that does not strictly follow rule warrants invoking the POC (Prevention of Corruption) Act,' the court said. CBI had filed the case against Jain in May 2018, based on a reference from Delhi lieutenant governor, to investigate allegations of irregularities in awarding a tender to a private firm for PWD's infrastructure projects. Senior officials of PWD, including its engineer-in-chief, were also named as accused. According to the FIR, Jain and other PWD officials were accused of irregularities in hiring a 'creative team' of consultants, in breach of recruitment and financial regulations. They were also accused of outsourcing professionals for PWD projects without the finance department's approval. To be sure, Jain is facing two other cases, one pertaining a disproportionate assets case, in which he is accused of amassing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income, up to approximately ₹1.62 crore between 2015 and 2017. Jain was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in the case in 2022 and granted bail in 2024. Jain is also facing an Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) probe over an alleged ₹7 crore bribe from a company tasked with installing CCTV cameras in Delhi. Both cases are at the Rouse Avenue Court and charges have not been framed in either. Following the verdict, AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal posted on X in Hindi: 'All the cases filed against 'you' leaders are false. With time, the truth will come out in all cases. We were sent to jail by filing false cases against us. Shouldn't all those who filed these false cases and the leaders at whose behest these false cases were filed be sent to jail?Whenever they wanted... they sent us to jail, and whenever they felt like it, they filed a 'closure report'? Is this justice?' The BJP did not respond to requests for comment on the matter. In its closure report in the PWD case, the CBI said that it found no criminality or evidence of personal gain, bribery or any criminal intent or violation of financial rules. On the hiring process, the CBI concluded that there was no irregularity in the selection process and the same was based on merit and qualification. Meanwhile, on the financial aspect, the agency found no irregularity of illicit gain to any of the accused, stating that the expenditure for the project was well within the threshold delegated to the PWD, and there was no mandatory requirement to consult the finance department. 'The hiring of professionals was necessary due to urgent departmental needs. A transparent recruitment process was followed through a competitive method, and no payments were made beyond prescribed norms and approved limits. Emoluments were neither excessive nor irregular,' the CBI said. A protest petition was moved by the Directorate of Vigilance of the Delhi government in 2022, challenging the report's findings, alleging that the CBI carried out a 'biased' probe, ignoring documentary evidence and relying solely on witness statements. Rejecting the protest plea, the court on Monday stated that the law clearly stated that suspicion cannot replace proof and even to charge someone, a strong suspicion was needed to proceed. 'The precedents relied upon by the complainant are distinguishable on the facts and do not help in the facts of the present case,' the court said.