Delhi High Court Clears Release Of Jayeshbhai Jordaar Film As Makers Assure To Insert Disclaimers Over Criminality Of Pre-Natal Sex Determination

Nupur Thapliyal

10 May 2022 12:48 PM GMT

  • Delhi High Court Clears Release Of Jayeshbhai Jordaar Film As Makers Assure To Insert Disclaimers Over Criminality Of Pre-Natal Sex Determination

    The Delhi High Court on Tuesday cleared the release of Ranveer Singh starrer Yashraj film "Jayeshbhai Jordaar" after it was assured by the producers that relevant disclaimers, to the effect that Pre-natal sex determination is a criminal offence, shall be depicted in relation to an ultrasound scene and another connected scene.A division bench comprising of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice...

    The Delhi High Court on Tuesday cleared the release of Ranveer Singh starrer Yashraj film "Jayeshbhai Jordaar" after it was assured by the producers that relevant disclaimers, to the effect that Pre-natal sex determination is a criminal offence, shall be depicted in relation to an ultrasound scene and another connected scene.

    A division bench comprising of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri disposed of a plea filed by an NGO namely Youth Against Crime, challenging the film over depiction of a prenatal sex-determination scene in the trailer. The film is set to hit the theatres on May 13.

    "Keeping in view that the film has already been certified and is scheduled to be released on May 13 and the disclaimer that has now been agreed to be shown during the scenes in question, the counsel for the Petitioner fairly submits that he does not wish to press the petition any further," the Court said.

    The plea was filed in public interest seeking to Central Board of Film Certification for deletion of some scenes from the movie which show a sex determination exercise being conducted at an ultrasound clinic.

    The plea filed by Advocate Pawan Prakash Pathak stated that though the film is based on Female Foeticide theme and strives to promote the cause of "Save Girl Child", its trailer advertises the use of ultrasound technique for sex selection which is squarely restricted under the Pre-Conception and Pre Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act, 1994.

    While the Bench had suggested that certain further disclaimers can be displayed in the trailer and the movie when scenes in question are shown, senior counsel appearing for the producers, without prejudice to his submissions, agreed to depict a static warning or disclaimer to be shown during concerned scenes.

    It was also submitted that similar warnings shall be depicted on all formats including trailer and other videos available on Youtube and other platforms. However, some time was sought as the same were already out in circulation.

    "Learned senior counsel assures the Court that the same shall be inserted in a week's time. Respondent no. 4 is made bound by the submissions made by the senior counsel on its behalf," the Court noted.

    At the outset, the Bench orally told the counsel for the petitioner that it appreciates the cause undertaken by him.

    During the course of hearing today, the counsel appearing for the Petitioner NGO submitted that such depiction was in violation of the PCPNDT Act, 1994. He also relied on the judgement delivered by the Apex Court in the case titled Dr. Sabu Mathew George v. Union Of India wherein the Court, taking note of the statement of objects and reasons and preamble of the Act, had emphasized on dignity, right and freedom of choice of a woman.

    On the other hand, the counsel appearing for the respondents being the Centre, Central Board of Film Certification and producers Yash Raj Films Private Limited, submitted that the movie had got clearance the Board, subject to a static disclaimer during the scene of ultrasound and pre natal gender test.

    It was submitted on behalf of the producers that the theme of the movie as to highlight the ills of female foeticide and it was in that light that the scenes were important to the movie and that the same did not in any manner advertise or promote use of such techniques. It was added that on the contrary, the scenes in question sought to discourage such tests.

    "Prohibition doesn't mean the ill from society has disappeared. It's still there," Justice Chawla had orally remarked during the course of hearing today.

    Yesterday, the Court had observed that the film, though intends to give a good message to the society, however, its trailer projected as if pre-natal sex-determination techniques (that are prohibited in law) were freely available for public.

    The counsel for the Petitioner, Pawan Prakash Pathak, insisted that the primary grievance was with respect to display of use of ultrasound technology for sex selection. Reference was made to sec. 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 6 & 22 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PCPNDT) Act, 1994.

    The Act provides for prohibition of sex selection, before or after conception, and for regulation of prenatal diagnostic techniques for the purposes of detecting genetic abnormalities, etc.

    Sec. 3A prohibits sex-selection, Section 3B prohibits sale of ultrasound machines, etc., to persons, laboratories, clinics, etc. not registered under the Act.

    Section 22 specifically prohibits advertisements relating to pre-natal determination of sex and punishment for contravention.

    Thus, it was prayed that the Respondent, Central Board of Film Certification may be directed to censor or delete the Ultrasound clinic scene from the film.

    "The plea stated thus:

    "The ultrasound clinic scene where the technology of ultrasound for sex selection is being advertised openly without censor and as per section 3, 3A, 3B, 4, 6 & 22 of the PC & PNDT Act, same is not allowed & hence the instant PIL."

    Mr. Jayant Mehta, Senior Advocate appeared on behalf of Yash Raj Films. TMT Law Practice team led by Abhishek Malhotra, Managing Partner, Naomi Chandra, Partner and Sanya Dua, Senior Associate represented Yash Raj Films.

    Case Title: Youth Against Crime v. Union of India & Ors.

    Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 430

    Next Story