Mere Hurting Of Sensibilities Not Defamation; CBFC Certificate Prima Facie Shows Film Not Defamatory : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Thursday while dismissing a plea to stay the release of film "Gangubai Kathiawadi" observed that the film certificate issued by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) prima facie showed that the film was not defamatory. The observation was made by the bench of Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari while considering SLP assailing Bombay High Court's order of rejecting to grant interim injunction restraining the respondents from releasing the film "Gangubai Kathiawadi", based on the book "Mafia Queens of Mumbai".The petition was filed by the person claiming to be an adopted son of the protagonist of the film "Gangubai Kathiawadi" seeking an interim relief to restrain the respondents from releasing the movie "Gangubai Kathiawadi" on the ground that it was defamatory to his adoptive mother.While dismissing the petition(Shri Babuji Rawji Shah vs S.Hussain Zaidi and others), the bench said,"There are no materials disclosed or even pleadings to show, even prima facie, that the petitioner was a family member or a near relative of Gangubai. The contention of the petitioner is that the story of Gangubai sought to be depicted is untrue, is vague and devoid of material particulars. In any case, whether the story is true or incorrect would have to be decided by the Court upon examination of the evidence. The film certificate issued by the CBFC prima facie shows that the film is not defamatory. Prima facie, it appears that the movie is an artistic expression within the parameters of law.In the circumstances, interim relief was rightly refused to the petitioner. The appeal of the petitioner is pending in the High Court. It is open to the petitioner to agitate all issues in the pending appeal. Any observations made in the impugned order at the interlocutory stage will not affect the decision in the appeal. The impugned order does not call for interference of this court."The Court further observed that "mere hurting of sensibility is not defamation, if the person said to be defamed is not lowered in character or credit in the eyes of others".While adjudicating on the issue as to whether ad interim stage should be granted or not, the bench noted that it was not in dispute that the film "Gangubai Kathiawadi" had already been given the requisite certificate by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) under the Cinematograph Act, 1952.Referring to section 5B and 6 of Cinematograph Act, 1952 and Rule 32 of the Cinematograph(Certification) Rules, 1983, the bench noted that the petitioner had apparently made no complaint to the CBFC."The fact that the film has been certified by CBFC, which comprises of a body of experts prima facie shows compliance with the requirements of the guidelines," bench said.While laying down the ingredients for maintaining an action in tort of defamation, Court said that mere hurting of sensibility is not defamation, if the person said to be defamed is not lowered in character or credit in the eyes of others."It is well settled that for interim relief, the court has to consider the prima facie case made out by the applicant for interim relief, both on the question of locus standi to sue, if questioned and on the merits of the prayer for interim relief. The Court also has to consider the balance of convenience," bench said while dismissing the appeal.HeadnotesFactual Summary : SLP Against Bombay High Court order refusing to grant interim injunction against release of the film "Gangubai Kathiawadi" - Dismissed - The film certificate issued by the CBFC prima facie shows that the film is not defamatory. Prima facie, it appears that the movie is an artistic expression within the parameters of law. (Para 25)Cinematograph Act, 1952 - Guidelines for certification of films - A book or a film that illustrates the consequences of a social evil must necessarily show that social evil. A film that carries a message and depicts social circumstances of a group of underprivileged women is not impermissible. (Para 11)Cinematograph Act, 1952 - The fact that the film has been certified by CBFC, which comprises of a body of experts prima facie shows compliance with the requirements of the guidelines. (Para 13)Torts - Defamation - Mere hurting of sensibility is not defamation, if the person said to be defamed is not lowered in character or credit in the eyes of others. (Para 22)Cinematograph Act, 1952 - An injunction action can be initiated even after a certificate is issued under the Cinematograph Act. The Court may examine the film and judge whether its public display, breaches the norms of decency or contravenes the law. A film which is defamatory or indecent or breaches copyright cannot be allowed to be exhibited only because a certificate has been issued. The examples are of course illustrative. (Para 10)Torts - For an actionable tort, there has to be a wrongful act, and damage or loss or inconvenience or annoyance caused to another, by reason of the wrongful act. Annoyance or...

Mere Hurting Of Sensibilities Not Defamation; CBFC Certificate Prima Facie Shows Film Not Defamatory : Supreme Court

Shruti Kakkar

"Mere hurting of sensibility is not defamation, if the person said to be defamed is not lowered in character or credit in the eyes of others"

Tags