Wild Karnataka Documentary: High Court Further Extends Interim Order Restraining Makers From Dealing With The Film Till Nov 17

The Karnataka High Court on Monday continued its interim order passed earlier, restraining the makers of the documentary 'Wild Karnataka' from dealing with the film in any manner. The film is a 52-minute natural history documentary based on the state's rich biodiversity, which first premiered on March 3, 2019. Today, at the 67th National Film awards ceremony held in Delhi, the Wild Karnataka documentary won two awards. The best exploration film (non-feature) award, while famous English broadcaster and environmentalist Sir David Attenborough, received a National Award for 'Best Narration/Voice Over' for the film. The awards were declared in March.Sir David Attenborough to get #NationalFilmAward for Best Narration for Non Feature Film #WildKarnataka.@wildkarnataka @KarnatakaWorld @MIB_India @PIB_India @Chatty111Prasad @AttenboroughSir #NationalFilmAwards2019 pic.twitter.com/bh8TtbOTT2— Directorate of Film Festivals, India (@official_dff) October 25, 2021 A division bench of Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi and Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum posted the matter for preliminary hearing on November 17. The interim order will continue till then.The court is hearing a petition filed by Ravindra N Redkar and Ullash Kumar RK, against alleged commercialization of the film and deprivation of Karnataka Forest Department (KFD) to its rightful share of proceeds. The plea states: "The Public Exchequer has been cheated and deprived of Crores of Rupees worth of revenue and furthermore, the Tiger Foundations/P.A.D.F.s have been deprived of donations which would have legitimately served the cause of conservation, especially in the current pandemic when the need to protect our natural resources and maintain a clean and healthy environment is highlighted." Advocate Vikram Huilgol appearing for the film-makers raised an objection on the maintainability of the petition submitting "Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Central Vista Project has detailed what the vehicle of a PIL was originally meant for and how that is being subverted. That is being done in this case." He added, "if there is any dispute it is between the government and me, what the petitioner alleges that I have acted beyond the scope of the MoU entered into between me and the government, it is a purely contractual issue and in fact, the government has come forward and stated that there is no violation and we permitted you to do it." The court by way of interim order has restrained the makers of the film and anyone claiming through them from using, publishing, reproducing, broadcasting, telecasting, marketing, selling, distributing, exhibiting or in any way dealing with the film or any part of it or the raw footage captured by them under the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) entered between them and the Karnataka Forest Depart in November 2014. Background As per the petition, the 5th to 7th Respondents (Sarath Champati, Kalyan Varma, Amoghavarsha JS), in 2014, approached the 2nd and 3rd Respondents (Principal Chief Conservator of Forest), proposing to produce on behalf of the Karnataka Forest Department a one-hour documentary film on the state's rich biodiversity. They also proposed to produce a high-quality coffee-table book with the visuals that they would capture along with the film. The plea claims that the Respondents did not seek a waiver of filming fees nor did they seek free accommodation in the Forest Rest Houses. It was also said that they planned to approach various corporate sponsors in Karnataka in order to fund the execution of this project. Further, the plea claims that the Respondents volunteered that it would be a non-commercial film and any revenues which would accrue, would be donated to the Tiger Conservation Fund/P.A.D.F. They also agreed that copyrights of the film solely vested with the KFD whereas the copyright of the remaining raw footage would be co-owned by the 5th to 7th Respondents and the KFD. The credits on the film and coffee-table book were to be equally given to the KFD and the sponsors. Later, a follow-up letter dated 05.04.2014 reiterating their earlier proposal was sent and mentioned the Protected Areas where they proposed to shoot for the film and the time periods. Thereafter, by letter dated August 20, 2014, the state government granted them permission to make the film and accordingly, an MoU was signed. The Petitioners allege that under Section 28 of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, it is only the 3rd Respondent who is the sole statutory authority empowered to sanction the shooting of the film inside Protected Areas. Moreover, no tender or competitive bids were called for, thus violating the provisions of the Karnataka Transparency in Public Procurements Act. The petition claims that the MOU was drafted with a malafide intention to favour the 5th to 7th Respondents with duplicitous clauses, including the clever introduction of the...

Wild Karnataka Documentary: High Court Further Extends Interim Order Restraining Makers From Dealing With The Film Till Nov 17

Mustafa Plumber

Tags