Supreme Court Disposes Plea Against Netflix Film 'Ghooskhor Pandat' After Director Agrees To Change Name
The Supreme Court on Thursday disposed of a petition filed against the Netflix movie 'Ghooskhor Pandat' after its director, Neeraj Pandey, informed by way of an affidavit that the objectionable title will be changed.The director further stated that the new title has not been finalised yet. The petition was filed on the ground that the film's title was derogatory towards the entire...
The Supreme Court on Thursday disposed of a petition filed against the Netflix movie 'Ghooskhor Pandat' after its director, Neeraj Pandey, informed by way of an affidavit that the objectionable title will be changed.
The director further stated that the new title has not been finalised yet. The petition was filed on the ground that the film's title was derogatory towards the entire Brahmin community.
Last week, the Court had also expressed its reservations with the film's title, asking why should a section of society be denigrated. The bench had asked the director to inform the stance on the new title.
Taking note of the affidavit filed by Pandey, a bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan today disposed of the petition. The bench also made an appeal to everyone to put a quietus to the controversy.
The film, starring Manoj Bajpayee, is slated to stream on Netflix. The title and associated promotional campaign drew criticism shortly after its announcement.
The controversy first reached the courts earlier this month after a writ petition was filed in the Delhi High Court opposing the title and the content. That plea alleged that the title amounts to collective defamation, stereotyping, and vilification of an entire religious and social community, and would cause irreversible harm to the dignity and reputation of Acharyas and the Brahmin community at large.
The Delhi High Court disposed of that writ petition noting that the producers have decided to change the title of the film to an alternate title which more accurately reflects the film's narrative and intent.
Also from the judgment - No One Can Denigrate Any Community By Speeches Or Art; Ministers Must Not Target Any Community: Supreme Court
Headnote
Constitution of India – Article 19(1)(a) – Freedom of Speech and Expression – Article 19(2) – Reasonable Restrictions – Cinematograph Act, 1952 – Film Certification – Judicial Interference – Petition filed seeking to restrain the release of the film "Ghooskhor Pandat," alleging offensive stereotyping against the Brahmin community - The Respondent/Producer filed an affidavit unequivocally withdrawing the title and undertaking that any new title would not be evocative of the earlier one - Supreme Court disposed of the petition, noting that the grievances were suitably addressed by this undertaking.
Fraternity and Constitutional Duty – Articles 51A and 51A(e) – Supreme Court noted that fraternity is a guiding philosophy of the Constitution - It is the fundamental duty of every citizen to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood - Vilifying or denigrating any community based on religion, language, caste, or region is constitutionally impermissible. [Para 11-14]
Standards for Judging Film Content – "The Ordinary Reasonable Man" – The effect of words or expressions in a movie must be judged by the standards of "reasonable, strong-minded, firm and courageous men," and not by those of weak or hypersensitive minds – Noted that the "man on the top of a Clapham omnibus" standard - Freedom of expression cannot be held to ransom by an intolerant group of people – Noted that if the rights of artists were subjected to popular notions of what is acceptable, the constitutional guarantee would be rendered illusory - Once a competent statutory Board grants a certificate, no individual or group can create disturbances in the exhibition of the film - Courts must be at the forefront to zealously protect the freedom of speech and expression, even if Judges personally dislike the spoken or written words. [Para 19, 22-24, 32-34]