Up to three years jail term for those involved in film piracy: Government
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Centre to take fresh call on ‘Udaipur Files' certification
The Centre on Friday told the Delhi high court that it would withdraw its order for further cuts in the controversial movie Udaipur files, related to the 2022 brutal murder of a tailor Kanhaiya Lal, and take a fresh call on its certification. Centre to take fresh call on 'Udaipur Files' certification The submission was made by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma before a bench of chief justice DK Upadhyay and justice Tushar Rao Gedela, after court questioned the government for exceeding its powers under Section 6(2) of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 by suggesting cuts instead of un-certifying or suspending the film's exhibition. 'We (Centre) will withdraw and revisit the order (July 21 of clearing the movie's release by recommending further cuts) and pass a fresh order in accordance with law. I'm (Centre) withdrawing due to the form of the order. It's not in compliance with section 6(2) of the Cinematograph Act, 1952,' the law officer representing the Centre and Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) submitted. In view of the law officer's statement, the court disposed of the petitions filed by Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind president Maulana Mahmood Arshad Madani, and Mohammad Javed, accused in the murder case, challenging the July 21 order but directed the government to take a fresh call by Wednesday. On July 21, had cleared the movie's release, subject to the filmmaker carrying out six additional edits, in addition to the 55 cuts already implemented. The direction to take a call by Wednesday was issued after the producer Amit Jani's counsel Gaurav Bhatia said that they planned to release the film on August 8 and needed adequate time for the same. 'After arguments on behalf of the parties were heard, ASG Chetan Sharma on instructions has stated that the government will withdraw the order dated July 21, and take a decision on the revision petition by the parties afresh. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of in terms of ASG's statement,' the court said in its order. It added, 'It has been urged by the producer that the next date for the film's release has been declared as August 8 and they shall take time for making arrangements for release of the movie by engaging theatres. After hearing the parties, an appropriate decision shall be taken by revisional authority on the revision petitions by Wednesday.' The petitions were listed before the high court, after the Supreme Court, while refusing to take a call on allowing the movie's release, had requested the high court to take up the matter on Monday. On July 10, the Delhi high court had temporarily halted the movie's release, which was scheduled to be exhibited in theatres on July 11. Javed in his petition, argued by senior advocate Maneka Guruswamy along with advocate Saumya Dwivedi, had asserted that the Centre, by suggesting cuts, acted beyond the statutory powers granted to it under section 6. Guruswamy had asserted that the same was egregious since the procedure followed by the government to pass the same was based on a repealed law. She pointed out that the Centre's order was based on the recommendations of a five member committee comprising three advisory members from the CBFC, but the inclusion of members of the CBFC was no longer permitted under the act. On the contrary, the law officer had earlier justified Centre's decision saying that the same as per the scheme of the act and was taken by a committee consisting of experts including senior government officers and 3 members of the CBFC, who were not involved in prior certification. Lal was murdered in June 2022 with a cleaver in Udaipur district, Rajasthan, for allegedly sharing a social media post endorsing the disparaging remarks made against Prophet Muhammad by former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) spokesperson Nupur Sharma. She made the comments while participating in a television debate in May 2022. The assailants, who were arrested by the Rajasthan police, even prepared a video claiming responsibility for the murder. They even displayed the weapon of offence used for the crime. Considering the sensitivity of the case, the matter was probed by the National Investigation Agency and the accused was charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). The trial in the case is pending before a special NIA court in Jaipur.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
Its authority questioned, government recalls 'Udaipur Files' cut order
NEW DELHI: After a second round of litigation, the fate of 'Udaipur Files' is back in the hands of central govt, which on Friday withdrew its direction for six cuts in the movie based on the murder of tailor Kanhaiya Lal. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Centre informed a Delhi HC bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela that it would examine the matter afresh within the contours of section 6 of the Cinematograph Act, after HC repeatedly highlighted procedural infirmity in govt's earlier decision. The bench was hearing two petitions challenging Centre's decision to allow the release of the movie after directing six further cuts. Taking note of Centre's revised stand, HC directed parties to the plea to appear before govt on Aug 4 and make submissions. It clarified that no further notice was required to be issued to the parties to appear before the revisional authority, and directed that they should not seek adjournment Monday. "After hearing the parties, an appropriate decision as per the law should be taken by the revisional authority on the revision petitions by Aug 6," HC said, as filmmakers submitted that the movie was scheduled to be released on Aug 8 and they would take some time to make arrangements for this by engaging theatres. Earlier in the day, the court asked Centre under what authority it had ordered six cuts while exercising its revisional powers. HC asked Centre's counsel to take instructions from authorities, and heard the matter again in the post-lunch session. The counsel informed the court that govt would withdraw the order, revisit the decision and pass a fresh order in accordance with the law. Noting the submissions, the court disposed of the petitions filed by Mohammed Javed, one of the accused in the murder case, and Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind president Maulana Arshad Madani. HC had said at the previous hearing that Centre had to exercise its revisional powers under the Cinematograph Act within the four corners of the statute.
India Today
3 days ago
- India Today
Centre to take fresh call on Udaipur Files after Delhi High Court questions cuts
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 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 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 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 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 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
