
Controversy may help film's performance: Top court defers 'Udaipur Files' hearing
The court said it would await the outcome of the proceedings before the Centre and posted the matter to next Monday, July 21. "We expect that the committee constituted by the Centre will hear the matter immediately, without any loss of time."The court allowed Javed, who was not a petitioner before the Delhi High Court, to appear before the committee. "We also permit Mohd Javed, as petitioner, to appear before the committee." The committee hearing was scheduled for 2:30 PM on Wednesday.At the time of writing, the meeting of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting committee was underway, with representatives of the filmmaker, a representative of Kanhaiya Lal's son, members of Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, and the lawyer for the accused Mohammad Javed in attendance.Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy, appearing for Mohammad Javed, said the film dealt with two sub judice matters - the Kanhaiya Lal murder case and the Gyanvapi case."The movie portrays the judiciary as well in a certain way. The movie is bordering on hate, and bringing the judiciary into disrepute. There is much at stake. They can't claim free speech to violate fair trial or lower judiciary's reputation."She said, "It is something that generates violence. It's vilification of a community. Not one positive aspect about the community shown."Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind President Maulana Arshad Madani, said, "When HC asked us, I personally saw the movie. I was shaken in every sense of the word. If any judge were to see it, they will be shocked. Its complete theme is of hate against the community... Not one positive aspect about the community shown... homosexuality, judicial matters, treatment of women... A democratic nation certifying such movie... unimaginable.""I had watched the movie... It's a thematic dissertation of hate... I am normally on the other side to say it should not be stopped... Please see the movie. It is something that generates violence-seeds violence-it's vilification of an entire community-violence, hate, homosexuality, denigration of women, child abuse by one community-unthinkable that a democratic nation would allow such a movie to be certified," Sibal added.Justice Kant responded, "Our judicial officers are not school-going children that they can be swayed by movie dialogues... absolutely confident about their objectivity... sense of detachment." He also said, "I was wondering how Mr Sibal found time to see the movie."advertisementSenior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia, appearing for the producers, told the court, "I got a valid certificate from CBFC... they didn't go to the valid authority... went to the High Court on the last date without even disclosing legitimate interest."He said, "My film was supposed to release at midnight. The order came at 8 pm. Nearly 1,750 theatres across India had booked the movie. We lost six crucial days."He also submitted that "the producer and director of the film as well as the son of the victim who was brutally murdered in 2022 are getting repeated threats to their life." The court directed the police to assess the threat perception and take steps to protect them.Justice Kant said, "Balance of convenience is in their favor... if movie is released, it can lead to irreparable loss... but if there is delay, you can be compensated." The court noted that Section 6 of the Cinematograph Act gave the central government the power to suspend or revoke certification.advertisementThe court observed, "If the film is released then both these pleas are infructuous... the revision petition before the government is also infructuous."It added, "We have impressed on the counsels for the parties to join the proceedings before the government committee and extend their cooperation for speedy disposal."The Delhi High Court had earlier said, "The high court vide impugned judgment has not expressed any opinion on the merits, especially regarding the allegations regarding content of the movie." The order was passed in a batch of pleas, including one filed by Maulana Arshad Madani, who contended that the film was communally divisive.Kanhaiya Lal Teli, an Udaipur-based tailor, was murdered in June 2022, allegedly by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous, who claimed it was in retaliation for a social media post in support of former BJP leader Nupur Sharma. The case was taken up by the National Investigation Agency and is under trial before a special NIA court in Jaipur. The film is based on these events.- Ends
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hindu
a few seconds ago
- The Hindu
HC seeks Centre, Delhi govt.'s response on traffic violations by e-commerce delivery agents
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked the Centre, Delhi government and Delhi Police to respond to a plea alleging traffic violations by e-commerce delivery riders. A Bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela ordered the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, Delhi Transport Department and Commissioner of Delhi Police to file their replies and posted the matter for hearing on October 8. Advocate Shashank Shri Tripathi in his petition alleged 'widespread, continued and unchecked' violations of the Motor Vehicles Act and the Central Motor Vehicles Rules by delivery partners of quick commerce and e-commerce platforms in the Capital. The counsel for the Delhi government informed the court that the government had already introduced a policy for two-wheelers – the Delhi Motor Vehicle Aggregator and Delivery Service Provider Scheme, 2023 – and had notified it on November 21, 2023. The scheme aims to license and regulate aggregators operating in the Delhi region. The court then asked the Delhi government to place on record the policy and for the authorities concerned to provide detailed information about the action taken against the violators. The plea alleged that delivery workers employed or contracted by various platforms routinely use two-wheelers to transport 'oversized, bulky and excessively heavy items,' including industrial toolkits, foldable furniture, and commercial-sized delivery boxes. 'These loads often exceed the permissible dimensions and weight limits under Indian traffic regulations, compromise the stability of vehicles, obstruct the vision of riders and endanger public safety,' it said. 'The continued tolerance of these unsafe delivery practices will create a dangerous precedent that encourages other commercial entities to disregard safety regulations, thereby potentially leading to a complete breakdown of vehicular discipline and road safety standards across Delhi and other urban centers, which would result in irreparable harm to public safety and the rule of law,' the petition said. The plea sought directions for framing and implementing binding regulatory guidelines governing delivery operations in the gig economy. Urbanclap Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. (Urban Company), Zomato Ltd., Bundl Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Swiggy), Amazon Seller Services Pvt. Ltd., Instakart Services Pvt. Ltd. (Ekart/Flipkart), Jubilant Foodworks Ltd. (Domino's), Connaught Plaza Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. (McDonald's), Kiranakart Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (Zepto), Innovative Retail Concepts Pvt. Ltd. (Bigbasket) and Smartshift Logistics Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (Porter) have been made parties to the case.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
VVIP chopper case: Delhi HC reserves order on MGF chief Shravan Gupta's plea against non-bailable warrants
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday reserved its order on a plea filed by Shravan Gupta , chairman of Delhi-based real estate developer MGF Group and a co-accused in the Rs 3,600 crore AgustaWestland VVIP chopper case, seeking quashing of non-bailable warrants (NBW) issued against him for not joining a money laundering investigation being carried out by the ED in the said case. Gupta's counsel informed the Delhi High Court that his client, who is currently in the UK, will not be able to join the investigation physically owing to his ill health. He said that Gupta can, however, join the ED investigation via video conferencing. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Select a Course Category Project Management Finance Healthcare CXO Digital Marketing Artificial Intelligence Technology Others Operations Management Leadership Degree MBA Design Thinking healthcare Data Analytics Public Policy PGDM Cybersecurity Data Science others Product Management Management Data Science MCA Skills you'll gain: Portfolio Management Project Planning & Risk Analysis Strategic Project/Portfolio Selection Adaptive & Agile Project Management Duration: 6 Months IIT Delhi Certificate Programme in Project Management Starts on May 30, 2024 Get Details Skills you'll gain: Project Planning & Governance Agile Software Development Practices Project Management Tools & Software Techniques Scrum Framework Duration: 12 Weeks Indian School of Business Certificate Programme in IT Project Management Starts on Jun 20, 2024 Get Details The ED told the court that Gupta failed to join the investigation despite issuance of nine summons by the agency in 2019-2020. The federal agency submitted that Gupta is willfully evading investigation and issuance of non-bailable warrants against him since he is required for "further investigation" in the AgustaWestland scandal. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Only Classless Women Wear these Over a Certain Age Learn More Undo It might be mentioned here that a special court here in August 2020 had issued NBW against Gupta which was later stayed by the Delhi High Court on Gupta's plea. Since then the stay on NBW is prevailing. The ED has alleged that offshore entities beneficially owned and controlled by Gupta received proceeds of crime to the tune of Euro 1,912,000 and $3,457,180 (Rs 28,69,94,650) in the VVIP chopper scandal. Live Events


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Delhi High Court orders Wipro to pay Rs 2 lakh to employee for defamatory remarks in relieving letter
Bengaluru: The Delhi High Court has asked Wipro to pay Rs 2 lakh to a former employee for defamatory remarks in a relieving letter. The former employee, aggrieved by the allegedly defamatory remarks in the letter, sought the issuance of a fresh letter that removes the statements damaging his character and professional integrity. The employee worked as a principal consultant from March 14, 2018, until June 5, 2020. The letter attributed his conduct as "malicious" and further claimed that his actions resulted in an irreparable breakdown in the employer-employee relationship, the court document said. The court ordered that Wipro must pay Rs 2 lakh as general compensatory damages to the employee, addressing the reputational damage, emotional distress, and loss of professional credibility caused by the defamatory remarks in the termination letter. You Can Also Check: Bengaluru AQI | Weather in Bengaluru | Bank Holidays in Bengaluru | Public Holidays in Bengaluru Furthermore, the court emphasised that allowing the defamatory remarks to remain on record would unjustly harm the employee's professional prospects and dignity. To ensure complete restitution, the court directed that all such remarks regarding the employee's professional character be expunged. Wipro must issue a fresh termination letter free of any defamatory content, rendering the original letter ineffective with respect to the defamatory statements. "Needless to observe, the issuance of a fresh letter and expungement of remarks shall not alter the decision of termination of the petitioner in any manner whatsoever," the court document showed.