BACKGROUND

As the world is progressing towards a society without boundaries, the opponents of media
censorship feel that censorship in general is a great hindrance to this progression. But then again,
as these various communication media dabble with topics that need not be promoted or talked
about at all, the question of censorship arises.

CENSORSHIP IN THE MEDIA

While most countries have given the freedom of speech and expression of thought to its citizens,
some countries try to counter the abuse of this right by some people, by restricting the freedom in
reception of this speech and expression. Basically, while you're allowed to say anything you want
and do whatever your heart desires (although subject to legal framework), you may not be free
enough to listen or appreciate others' freedom of speech or action. This is the whole crux of
censorship. Doing what you want is fine, as long as the others don't see it.
While each country and each culture censors the media in one way or the other, the amount of
censorship or the cut-off level which defines what to show and what not to show, differs. There
are also different types of censorship. One of the most common criteria behind censorship is the
age limits for viewing different media. Sometimes the censorship can be a blanket ban on a
certain taboo topics and the definition of a taboo topic would be defined according to the
governing authority in the country.1
Censorship and the debate surrounding it has never been so much in circulation as in present
times. Censorship can be simply defined as a control exercised over the ideas and information
circulated among people. Some common ways in which censorship is enforced include bleeping
of words, blocking of images displayed etc. Censorship in media has been seen in almost every
country and has been the stand out feature of many dictators. History has been replete with
examples of individuals with power exercising their power to affect mass media censorship. This
is because media has always had a massive following and reader base.2
Dissemination of information is immediate through the media and can therefore have far
reaching effects. While the debate on censorship in the media is a never ending one there are
some definite advantages of media censorship.

1. Uttara Manohar, Media Censorship: Why is Censorship Good available at http://

www.buzzle.com/articles/media-censorship-why -is-censorship-good.html
2. http://www.infojug.com/articles/reasons-for-media-censorship.html

Freedom of speech is one of the most basic of human rights and yet there are some boundaries
that need to be drawn with particular respect to sensitive issues.
Censorship has become a serious issue, and not only in the media. As a community, we are
heavily influenced by the media and other sources of information- however, we tend to overlook
the fact that there is not only much bias but also skewed perceptions of events and reports in the
news today. The media does a poor job portraying things as they really are in order to follow a
sort of convention and to keep their show on air or their papers in stores. As a result, most of the
time we are being fed information that may not be entirely true and sometimes even very far
from the truth. This sad fact is how we've been living and understanding the world around us.
The media has the ability to manipulate its viewers in ways that are often unseen. Driven by
money, greed and popularity, most media outlets are fighting to report what they believe we want
to hear not what we really should hear.

DEFINITION OF MEDIA
Media can be defined as Communication channels through which news, entertainment,
education, data or promotional messages are disseminated. Media includes every broadcasting
and narrowcasting medium such as newspapers, magazines, T.V, radio, billboards, direct mail,
telephone, fax and internet. Media is a plural of medium and can take a plural or singular verb,
depending on the sense intended.3
As per Oxford Dictionary, Media is the main means of mass communication(television,
radio and newspapers) regarded collectively.4

MEANING OF CENSORSHIP
Censorship means the official licensing or suppressing on certain grounds authorized by the law,
of books, plays, letters, news or military intelligence and to censor means to exercise such
control over, make excisions of changes in.
Censorship is when a work of art expressing an idea which does not fall under current

convention is seized, cut up, withdrawn, impounded, ignored, maligned, or otherwise made
inaccessible to its audience.

3. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/media.html
4. http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/media

According to Harold D. Laswell, censorship is the policy of restricting the public expression
of ideas, opinions, conceptions and impulses which have or believed to have the capacity to
undermine the governing authority or the social and the moral order which that authority
considers itself bound to protect. Censorship thus, affects vitally the freedom of speech and
expression since its essence consists in the exercise of control or imposition of restraint.
The suppression or control of ideas, public communication and information circulated within a
society is termed as censorship. The freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution of India
can be suppressed if it is considered objectionable, harmful, or necessary to maintain communal
harmony. Governments across the globe have used religious arguments as well as other powerful
techniques and arguments to support for their censorship efforts. Offensive communication in the
eyes of the government varies from country to country, religion to religion, even sect to sect.
Many governments provide for certain limited protection against censorship. It is always
necessary to balance conflicting rights in order to determine what can and cannot be censored.
A classic example of censorship in India is the Central Board of Film Certification or Censor
Board, which comes under the purview of Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The Board
regularly orders, directors to remove anything it deems offensive or subjects considered to be
politically subversive. The censorship of films is governed by the Cinematograph Act, 1952. It
assigns certification as Universal, Adults, and Parental Guidance to films in India before public
exhibition.
The era of censor restriction began in British India when the film Bhakta Vidura (1921) was
banned because its protagonist bore a strong resemblance to Mahatama Gandhi. In 1978, the
Central Board Of Film Censor (renamed Central Board Of Film Certification in 1982) referred to
the political film Kissa Kursi Ka (The Tale of a Chair), an innuendo about the politicians to the
Information & Broadcasting Ministry for further clearance. This was eventually destroyed only
to be remade and released latter. In 1981, the film Meri Awaaz Suno, about a policeman who
infiltrates an underworld gang to discover its nexus with politicians, was first granted an A
certificate, but subsequently suspended under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 citing that the film
depicted excessive violence.

5. Ritu Menon, for Womens World Organization for Rights, Literature and Development

MEDIA CENSORSHIP
Media censorship is the process wherein particular things said by media personalities that may
harm other peoples privacy or may affect anyones stand with specific topics are prohibited to be
shown or said publicly.

REASONS FOR MEDIA CENSORSHIP

Censorship in Media can obstruct transfer of crucial information but sometimes a problematic
situation may require such a censorship. There are a number of reasons for Media Censorship:

Barring or controlling content that is obscene or sexual, language that is obscene, content
that displays violence, use of drugs and other questionable content. The requirement to bar or
limit the content is to ensure that the interests of children and family are protected and the
religious beliefs are respected. Pornography censorship is widely seen around the world and it
may seem correct that such a censorship is enforced particularly with the ease with which such
material can be obtained and accessed through the internet. Other morally questionable material
is also often subject to censorship.
Religion and religious beliefs are also used as a rationale for media censorship or
suppression. Sometimes it is important to control the information particularly where the situation
pertains to religious problems and information wrongly distributed in a tense situation can cause
explosive results. However religion has been wrongly used to clamp down on media, particularly
in some eastern parts of the world.
The developing world has also in the past used their culture and customs as a reason
while enforcing media censorship using the argument that media and the western culture are
responsible for harming its people and their long standing traditions.
Security of the nation and defense is also another reason why censorship of media widely
occurs. Military censorship has been used to guard military intelligence and other security
aspects. Since time immemorial governments have been known to exercise their powers and
influence to clamp down on media outlets so as to turn around a situation to their advantage or at
least as a way to reduce the public disapproval towards its wrong functioning.
At times historical events and considerations were also used to implement censorship in
media. E.g.: In Germany it is illegal to glorify in any way the Nazis or their activities and
symbols.
Many eastern countries have had histories of dictators enforcing media censorship to
cover up for the atrocities and wide spread problems created by their governments.Political
censorship has been used as a tool to curb free expression. In present times internet is one
medium that has allowed faster transfer of information and has been used by governments and
other agencies to restrict the transfer of information in some cases.

Companies have also at times resorted to media censorship whereby information

pertaining to their business activities is controlled or restricted. This is particularly practiced
where companies have had to face adverse publicity because of some problems in its business
operations.6
In F.A Picture International v. Central Board of Film Certification7, the Bombay High Court
held that Censorship in a free society can be tolerated within narrowest possible confines and
strictly within the limits which are contemplated in a constitutional order.
Moreover, the Supreme Court of India in the case S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan8 observed as
follows while upholding the censorship of films by prior restraint:
The movie cannot function in a free market place like the newspaper, magazine or
advertisement. Movie motivates thoughts and actions and assures a high degree of attention
and retention. It makes its impact simultaneously arousing the visual and aural senses. The
focusing of an intensive light on screen with the dramatizing of facts and opinions makes
the idea more effective. The combination of act and speech, sight and sound, in semidarkness of the theatre with elimination of all distracting ideas, will have an impact in the
minds of the spectators.It has as much potential for evil as it has for good. It has an equal
potential to instill or cultivate violent or good behavior. With these qualities, and since it
caters for mass audience who are generally not selective about what they watch the movie
cannot be equated with other modes of communication. Censorship by prior restraint is,
therefore, not only desirable but also necessary.

PROS OF MEDIA CENSORSHIP

Firstly, it is important that we reduce the violence that is on TV, at least for our children.
We dont want our children thinking that it is cool to be all heartless and go on picking
off people on the streets. On the contrary, emphasis needs to be made on the fact that
killing people is illegal and immoral. Hence the amount of violence the media broadcasts
ought to be censored at least for the kids.

6.Ashwini Ambekar, Reasons for Media Censorship available on http://www.articleswave.com

7. AIR 2005 Bom 145

8. Civil Appeal No. 1668 of 1988, Decided on 30th March, 1989.

Sex is another topic which creates a great hullabaloo amongst the people. Why should sex
be shown on TV? Sex, especially porn, sometimes illustrates a lot of unnatural and at
times disturbing videos. It is quite likely that it may again have a negative impact on
children who might think it to be true. Hence, these two topics, sex and violence, ought to
be restricted to people in the age group who understand and appreciate that all this is
fictional.
One more area where media censorship is heavily applied is in the advertisements of
alcohol and cigarettes. Some countries believe that both smoking and consuming alcohol
have a negative effect on the human body and ought not to be advertised anyway. Which
I feel is a fair point. No tobacco or alcohol company in its right mind would ever air the
ill effect of the products they are producing. And there are few health benefits that these
companies boast of. As it is, these companies already enjoy substantial word-of-mouth
advertising. Hence, the media censorship for these companies sounds justifiable to me.
Censorship helps preserve the secrets of a nation being revealed.
The act of censorship helps protects individual privacy.
The act of censorship helps prevent terrorist group from learning about dangerous
technological advances.
Censorship can help hide sensitive military information.
It helps avoid plagiarism.9
Sometimes dirty laundry ought not to be aired in public. A lot of people are given to
violent speeches and derogatory and unfounded comments on a particular religion or
race. Some people may try to spread nonsensical propaganda through an unsuspecting
media. While it may take a bit to argue with their freedom of speech, perhaps it is best
ignored.
Another interesting argument in favor of media censorship is the security of secrets.
Ignorance is bliss, they say and it is in the best interest of a country and its people that the
plans of our armies are kept under wraps. Sometimes we need to blindly trust them. One
interesting example of where media censorship could have been used was when the
terrorists attacked Mumbai in 2008. The news reporters explained the counter-terrorist
operation in fine detail on TV and perhaps some terrorists in the hotel, in which they were
hiding, could have just flicked on his TV and could have been pre-warned of the
upcoming actions of the counter-terrorists. Hence, some things are best not known.
To conclude the media censorship I would like to say that the media is an extremely
powerful force, which can reap great benefits if used positively and can be very
damaging if not. It is like nuclear energy, which if used well, has great benefits for
humanity, but there may be some, who might want to use it for the wrong reasons.

9. http://censorship.laws.com/censorship/pros-of-censorship

MEDIA CENSORSHIP CONS

Sometimes, media censorship may be done to serve the vested interests of the governing
authorities. Let's say that a foreign news channel is running an unbiased documentary on
the leadership of your country, the governing bodies of your country cannot do much
about what that person or channel is saying, except stop the people of your country from
tuning into such shows. Hence here, censorship is used to keep the ignorant, ignorant.
I had previously made a point about how taboo topics like sex are best censored, but just
because they are taboo topics, doesn't mean that they ought not to be dealt with maturely.
Sex education and awareness of STDs and AIDS needs to be spread in many countries
and you cannot brush these pressing topics under the carpet as taboo topics. The question
is what to show and what not to show.
Is ignorance really bliss? About some things, maybe. But the knowledge about the
emerging technological trends and innovations needs to be spread among the people of
the world. If knowledge doesn't spread, then it leads to intellectual stagnation. The search
for knowledge is what has brought humanity to where it is today, and suppression of
knowledge would be a step backwards rather than forwards.
Sugar coats real situations. Just because there are things that people dont want to see
doesnt mean they dont happen in real life. If they want television censored, are they
going to censor the news too?
It goes against the First Amendment that states that as Americans we have freedom of
speech and freedom of press.
It prevents the free flow of ideas.
It may intrude on the privacy of a person.
Withholding of information only leads to ignorance in the society.
Leads people to see everything different. Just puts a facade on life.Censoring of
information may lead to a wrong image perceived by the public.
How much freedom is good? Censorship they say negates the freedom of speech. What's
the point of your right to speak if there is no one to listen to what you are speaking? Then
why speak at all? Doesn't the very concept of censorship clash with the idea of
democracy? Then if we are going to cover the ears of our listeners, then what is the
difference between democracy and dictatorship?10

To conclude, the cons I would like to say that censorship is all about degree. About how much to
show and how much to hide. has its pros, but if the content in the media is manipulated by some
people with vested interests, then the whole point of democracy and freedom of thought goes out
of the window anyway.

10. Ibid.

LAW REGARDING MEDIA CENSORSHIP

CINEMATOGRAPH ACT:
The 1909 Cinematograph Act was introduced in response to concerns regarding the safety

of the buildings in which films were shown following a number of incidents involving
highly unstable nitrate film stock setting fire to number of cinemas.
The 1909 Cinematograph Act brought cinemas under local authority control and required
them to be licensed.
The Cinematograph Act became enforceable on 1st January 1910.
CINEMATOGRAPH ACT, 1952:
An act to make provision for the certification of cinematograph films for exhibition and for
regulating exhibitions by means of cinematographs.
The Act created the Censor Board or the Board of Film Certification. Any film intended for
public exhibition was required to get a certificate from the Board sanctioning the film for
restricted or unrestricted viewing. The guiding principles for certification of films under the Act
are an echo of the restrictions under Article 19(2).

IMPORTANT PROVISIONS OF THE CINEMATOGRAPH ACT, 1952

Section 2(c) of the Act provides for the definition of cinematograph. It says that
cinematograph includes any apparatus for the representation of moving pictures or series
of pictures.
Board of Film Censors (Section 3)
The Central Government constitutes a Board to be called the Board of Film
Certification for the purpose of sanctioning films for public exhibition.
The Board consists of a Chairman and twelve to twenty five members appointed
by the Central Government.
Examination of Films (Section 4)

Any person desiring to exhibit any film shall in the prescribed manner make an
application to the Board for certificate in respect thereof, and the Board may, after
examining or having the film examined in the prescribed manner:
1. Sanction the film for unrestricted public exhibition.
2. Sanction the film for public exhibition restricted to adults, or

3. Sanction the film for public exhibition restricted to members of any

profession or any class of persons, having regard to the nature , content
and theme of the film; or;
4. Direct the applicant to carry out such modifications in the film as it
thinks necessary before sanctioning the film for public exhibition
under any of the foregoing clauses; or;
5. Refuse to sanction the film for public exhibition.
Certification of Films (Section 5-A)
After examination of films , the Board grants certificate to the person applying
for.
The film suitable for unrestricted public exhibition is granted U certificate.
The film suitable for unrestricted public exhibition with the endorsement of the
nature is granted UA certificate.
The film is not suitable for unrestricted public exhibition, but is suitable for public
exhibition restricted to adults or, as the case may be, is suitable for public
exhibition restricted to members of any profession or any class of persons, it shall
grant to the person applying for a certificate in respect of the film an A
certificate or as the case may be, a S certificate.
A certificate granted or an order refusing to grant a certificate in respect of any
film shall be published in the Gazette of India.
A certificate granted by the Board under this section shall be valid throughout
India for a period of ten years.

Principles for Guidance in the Cinematograph Act (Section-5B)

1. A film shall not be certified for public exhibition if, in the opinion of the authority
competent to grant the certificate, the film or any part of it is against the interests
of [the sovereignty and integrity of India] the security of the State, friendly
relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or involves
defamation or contempt of court or is likely to incite the commission of any
offence.
2. Subject to the provisions contained in sub-section (1), the Central Government
may issue such directions as it may think fit setting out the principles which shall
guide the authority competent to grant certificates under this Act in sanctioning
films for public exhibition.]

Appeals (Section 5-C)

Any person applying for a certificate in respect of a film who is aggrieved by an
order of the Boarda) Refusing to grant a certificate ; or
b) Granting only an A certificate; or
c) Granting only a S certificate; or
d) Granting only an UA certificate; or
e) Directing the applicant to carry out any excisions or modifications, may,
within thirty days from the date of such order,
Prefer an appeal to the Tribunal by a petition in writing and shall be accompanied by a brief
statement of the reasons for the order appealed against where such statement has been furnished
to the appellant and by such fees, not exceeding one thousand.
Constitution of Appellate Tribunal (Section 5-D)
The Central Government shall, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute
an Appellate tribunal for hearing appeals against any order of the Board under
Section 5C.
The Head Office of the Tribunal shall be at New Delhi or at such other place as
the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, specify.
Such Tribunal shall consist of a Chairman and not more than four other members
appointed by the Central Government.
Suspension and Revocation of certificate (Section 5E)
The Central Government may suspend a certificate granted for a period as it
thinks fit or may revoke such certificate if it is satisfied that
i. The film in respect of which the certificate was granted, was being
exhibited in a form other than the one in which it was certified, or
ii. The film or any part thereof, it being exhibited in contravention of the
provisions of this part rules made thereunder.
The Central Government may require the applicant for certificate or any other
person to whom the rights in the film have passed, or both, to deliver up the
certificate and all duplicate certificates, if any, granted in respect of the film to the
Board or to any person or authority specified in the sam id notification.
During the period in which a certificate remains suspended, the film shall be
deemed to be an uncertified film.
Review of Orders by Central Government (Section 5F)
An application for a certificate or any other person to whom the rights in the film
have passed who is aggrieved by any order of the Central Government may,
within sixty days of the date of publication of the notification in the Official
Gazette, make an application to the Central Government for review of the order.
Penalties (Section 7)

If any person exhibits or permits to be exhibited in any place any film other than a
film which has been certified by the Board shall be punishable with imprisonment
for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine which may extend to one
lakh rupees, or with both, and in the case of a continuing offence with a further
fine which may extend to twenty thousand rupees for each day during which the
offence continues.
Power of Seizure (Section-7A)
Where a film in respect of which no certificate has been granted under this Act is
exhibited, or a film certified as suitable for public exhibition restricted to adults is
exhibited to any person who is not an adult or a film is exhibited in contravention
of any of the other provisions contained in this Act any public officer may enter
any place in which he has reason to believe that the film has been or is being or is
likely to be exhibited, search it and seize the film.
Cinematograph exhibitions to be licensed (Section-10)
No person shall give an exhibition by means of a cinematograph elsewhere that in
a place licensed under this Part or otherwise than in compliance with any
conditions and restrictions imposed by such licenses. The authority having power
to grant licenses shall be the District Magistrate.
Power of Central Government or Local Authority to suspend exhibition of films in
certain cases (Section-13)
The Lieutenant-Governor or, as the case may be , the Chief commissioner , in
respect of whole or any part of a Union Territory, and the District Magistrate in
respect of the District within his jurisdiction, any, if he is of opinion that any film
which is being publicly exhibited is likely to cause a breach of the peace, by
order, suspend the exhibition of the film by an order for a period of two months
and during such suspension the film shall be deemed to be an uncertified film in
the State, part or district, as the case may be.
Proposed Bill
Three broad features that are being proposed in the new bill Cinematograph Act
2010 of India are: an emphasis to contemporize issues, incorporation of
technological changes which have vastly changed since 1952 when the
Cinematograph Act was enacted and much harsher penalties in cases of copyright
violations.

CASES OF CENSORSHIP
In Brij Bhushan & Anr, vs. The State of Delhi,11 the Chief Commissioner of Delhi
issued an order against the printer, publisher and editor of the English Weekly of Delhi
called the Organiser. The Court held that there can be no doubt that to impose pre
censorship on a journal, such as has been ordered by the Chief Commissioner in this case,
it is a restriction on the liberty of the press which is included in the right to freedom of
speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1) (a) of the constitution.

11.AIR 1950 SC 129

 In K.A. Abbas case,12 the petitioner for the first time challenged the validity of censorship
as violative of his fundamental right of speech and expression. The Supreme Court
however observed that, pre-censorship of films under the Cinematograph Act was
justified under Article 19(2) on the ground that films have to be treated separately from
other forms of art and expression because a motion picture was able to stir up emotion
more deeply and thus, classification of films between two categories A (for adults only)
and U (for all) was brought about. With regard to the power of pre-censorship,
Hidayatullah C.J. observed therein as follows:
The task of the censor is extremely delicate.The standards that we set out for our
censors must make a substantial allowance in favour of freedom thus leaving a vast area
for creative art to interpret life and society with some of its foibles along with what is good.
We must not look upon such human relationship as banned and forever from human
thought and must give scope for talent to put them before society.

Furthermore, in Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon13, the Supreme Court
re-affirmed the afore-mentioned view and upheld the order of the Appellate Tribunal
(under the Cinematograph Act) which had followed the Guidelines under the
Cinematograph Act and granted an A certificate to a film.
In S. Rangarajan v. P Jagjivan Ram,14 a division bench of Madras High Court revoked
the U-Certificate (suitable for all ages) granted to a Tamil film called Ore Oru
Gramathile (In one village) , that dealt with the controversy surrounding affirmative
action and the problems of the caste. This was challenged before a three judge bench of
the Court. The State made two arguments: First, that the depiction of the governments
reservation policy was biased; and secondly, that the reaction in the state of Tamil Nadu
was bound to be volatile.

12.AIR 1971 SC 481

13. 1996 4 SCC 1
14. AIR 1989

PRONOUNCEMENTS UNDER THE CINEMATOGRAPH ACT 1952

It is a settled law that a film maker of a film has a fundamental right under Article 19(1) (a) of
the Constitution of India. In this case the film had been sent by the Examination Committee in
Madras in February 1993, however no order had been passed till October 1993, when the
petitioner approached the Court. The Court held that the power of the Respondent in connection
with grant of censorship certificate is coupled with the duty and they are expected to pass orders
expeditiously on any application made for censorship of film. Further it was held that the Court
cannot take the role of the Censor Board and state whether the picture can be released for public
exhibition or not in the absence of any order passed on the application of the Petitioner by the
Respondents under the provisions of Cinematograph Act 1952.15
In B.K Adarsh v. Union of India,16 the Court held that mere grant of certification to other films
which have more or similar obscene or pornographic scenes or events or sequences does not
automatically entitle a producer like petitioner of a motion picture to certification under section
5A of the Act. It is the particular film that needs certification has to be viewed and if it is found
to be in conformity with the law then alone it is entitled to a certification under section 5A of the
Act. The petitioner is entitled to avail protection or Article 14 of the Constitution of India on this
ground if it is found to have violated the law.
In Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Manubhai D. Shah,17 it was held that the onus of
proving that the film did not confirm with the requirements of law lies on the party which claims
that it was entitled to refuse enforcement of this right.
In Ramanlai v. Central Board of Film Certification,18 it was held that refusal to grant a
certificate for public exhibition because of its being based on and depicting superstitious
practices cannot be sustained. It is in violation of the guidelines as also sub section (1) of Section
5B of the Act. To the extent the refusal to give a certificate of public exhibition be based on this
ground, the refusal is liable to be quashed.

15. R.K Siar Productions v. UOI, AIR 1995 Mad 4

16. AIR 1990 AP 100
17.AIR 1993 SC 71

IMPACT OF FILM AND T.V ON CRIME IN MODERN SOCIETY

In Moorthy v. State of Tamil Nadu,18 the Supreme Court converted the death sentence under
section 302 of the Indian Penal Code into imprisonment for life by making the following
observation:
His mental agitation was further fuelled by the movie, showing murder after murder.
The vicious effect of films picturizing violence in detail on impressionable minds has been
subject of serious concern for some time now, but unfortunately no effective step has been
taken so far to curb the growing tendency of the section of the film industry to cash on
human weakness. And when this upsets a young man, already vulnerable disturbed, the
society cannot be completely absolved from sharing the responsibility of the resulting
tragedy.

LIST OF MOVIES BANNED IN INDIA

Dat
e

Film

Notes

195 Neel Akasher

9
Neechey

It was banned for two months for overt political overtones; it showed
the troubles faced by an immigrant Chinese wage laborer in 1930s
Calcutta.

196
Gokul Shankar
3

It was banned for depicting the psychological motivations

of Nathuram Godse, the assassin of Mahatma Gandhi.

197
Garam Hawa
3

The release was held up by the censors for 8 months. The film
depicted a Muslim family during the partition of India.

197
Aandhi
5

It was banned during Emergency by Indira Gandhi and subsequently

released in 1977 after Janata Party came into power.

197 Kissa Kursi Ka

7

A political spoof, the film was banned by the Congress government

for lampooning the Emergency. The master prints and all copies was

lifted from the Censor Board office and burned by Sanjay

Gandhi supporters. The movie was later remade with a different cast.

197
Sikkim
1

The film was banned after Sikkim's merger in India in 1975, as it

showed the Chogyal-ruled Sikkim as a sovereign state. The ban was
lifted in September 2010.

Indiana Jones and

198
It was banned temporarily for its "negative" depiction of Indians. The
the Temple of
4
ban was later rescinded.
Doom

198
Pati Parmeshwar
7

It was denied a rating by the Censor for depicting a woman in

"ignoble servility" of her husband. Later, Bombay High Court
allowed its release.

199
Kuttrapathirikai
3

The film was completed in 1993. As it had Rajiv

Gandhi's assassination as a backdrop, it was not released until 2007.

199
Bandit Queen
4

It was banned temporarily by the Delhi High Court after Phoolan

Devi, the subject of the film's story, challenged its authenticity.

199 Kama Sutra: A

6
Tale of Love

It was banned due to sexual content. The version released in India had
2 minute cut of nudity.

199
Fire
6

On its opening day in India, some film theatres were attacked by

Hindu fundamentalists for depicting a lesbian relationship. The film
was withdrawn and sent to back to the Censor Board.But, later it was
released uncut.

200
Paanch
1

It was banned for glorifing drugs, sex and violence, later certified
with cuts but went unreleased.

200
Hawayein
3

The film, set against the backdrop to the 1984 Sikh genocide, is
banned in the Indian states of Delhi, J&K, Haryana and Punjab.

200
The Pink Mirror
4

The film was denied a rating for its homosexual content.

200
Final Solution
4

The documentary film was banned by the Censor Board for being
provocative and under concerns that it may trigger communal
violence.[21] It was based on the 2002 Gujarat violence. But, it was
cleared after some months.

200
Hava Aney Dey
4

The movie was not approved by the Censor Board because the
director didn't accept the suggested 21 cuts.

200 Black Friday

5
(2004 film)

The movie was based on the 1993 Bombay bombings. The released
was blocked until the verdict of the lawsuit by the Bombay High
Court on the petition of the under-trials. The film was originally set to
be released in India on 28 January 2005. The producers appealed at
the Supreme Court but the High Court order was upheld. The movie
finally saw its release on 9 February 2007.

200
Amu (film)
5

The movie was based on the 1984 anti-Sikh riots. The film faced
problems with the censor board in India, which cleared it only with 6
politically motivated cuts, and with an "A" certificate. Since
according to Indian law this made the movie ineligible to be
telecast on Indian television, the producers later reapplied for a UA
censor certificate. This was when a 10 minute cut was suggested by
censors, including removal of all verbal references to the riots.
Subsequently, the producers decided to forgo the lower certification,

and released the movie directly to DVD.

200
Water
5

The movie faced opposition during its shooting from hardline Hindu
organizations in Varanasi. The sets were destroyed. The Uttar Pradesh
government decided to stop the shooting on 31 January 2000. The
shooting was shifted to Sri Lanka later. The movie was released in
India much later in March 2007.

200
Had Anhad
9

The Central Board of Film Certification refused a certificate to

this Shabnam Virmani documentary without cuts. In 2011, Delhi High
Court allowed the film to be released uncut and asked the Union of
India to pay 10,000 to the petitioner as legal fees.

The Girl with the

2011
Dragon Tattoo

It was banned for its adult scenes of rape and torture. The Central
Board of Film Certification demanded that these scenes be cut, which
the director David Fincher refused to do.

201
No Fire Zone
4

The Sri Lankan Civil War documentary was not allowed for public
screening by the Censor Board. Director Callum Macrae decided to
release the film on the internet to circumvent the ban.

Ban on screening of motion picture Ganga-Jal:

In the case of Anirudh Prasad Yadav v. Union of India,19 the petitioner filed a writ petition
alleging that the name of the petitioner, elected leader Sadhu Yadav as name of villain in film
had been used to malign and demolish image of petitioner. The Court held that the Petitioner
failed to show that any fundamental right had been infringed by naming villain of film as Sadhu
Yadav. Any resemblance with any character of film, could not be said to be intentionally filmed
on the life of the Petitioner.Except the similarity in the name no other similarities had been
shown that exhibition of film will prima facie damage his reputation and sabotage his political
and social image.

18. (1988) 3 SCC 207

19. AIR 2004 All 123

In M/S Prakash Jha Productions & Anr. V. Union of India & Ors,20 the Supreme Court held
that once the Central Board for film certification has cleared the film for public viewing, the
screening cannot be prohibited in a manner as has been done by the U.P Government. The Bench
while clearing decks for release of Prakash Jhas film Aarakshan in U.P, said it was states duty
to maintain law and order and quashed an order banning the films screening for two months.

CONCLUSION
To conclude the media censorship, I would like to say that media is an extremely powerful force,
which can reap great benefits if used positively and can be very damaging if not. It is like nuclear
energy, which if used well, has great benefits for humanity, but there may be some, who might
use it for the wrong reasons.
Censorship is all about degree. About how much to show and how much to hide. It has its pros,
but if the content in the media is manipulated by some people with vested interests, then the
whole point of democracy and freedom of thought goes out of the window anyway. The
questions that the censor boards need to ask themselves are what is the rationale behind the
censorship? And are we censoring the media as per that rationale? Is the media being allowed to
display what it ought to display? Are they showing things that people want to or need to know
about?

20. AIR 2011 SC

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I express my sincere gratitude to Miss Pooja Bharadwar for her inspiration, expert guidance,
moral boosting, continuous encouragement and appreciation which are the vital factors in
successful completion of my project work.
I express gratitude towards her as she left no stone unturned to help me in the completion of my
project work.
I humbly acknowledge deep gratitude towards my teacher.
Thanking You.

CONTENTS
Media and Censorship with reference to Cinematograph Act, 1952:
Acknowledgement
Table of Cases
Background
Censorship in the Media
Definition of Media
Meaning of Censorship
Media Censorship
Reasons for Media Censorship
Pros of Media Censorship
Media Censorship Cons
Law regarding Media Censorship:
Cinematograph Act, 1952
Important Provisions of the Act
Cases of Censorship
Pronouncements under the Cinematograph Act, 1952
Impact of film and T.V on crime in modern society
List of movies banned in India
Ban on screening of motion picture Ganga-Jal
Conclusion
Footnotes
Bibliography

TABLE OF CASES

F.A Picture International v. Central Board of Film Certification, AIR 2005 Bom. 145
S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan, Civil Appeal No. 1668 of 1988, Decided on 30th March,
1989
Brij Bhushan & Anr, vs. The State of Delhi, AIR 1950 SC 129
K.A. Abbas v. Union of India, 1971 SCR 445
Bobby Art International v. Om Pal Singh Hoon, 1996 4 SCC 1
S. Rangarajan v. P Jagjivan Ram, AIR 1989
B.K Adarsh v. Union of India, AIR 1990 AP 100
Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Manubhai D. Shah, AIR 1993 SC 171
Ramanlai v. Central Board of Film Certification, AIR 1988 Bom 278
Moorthy v. State of Tamil Nadu, (1998) 3 SCC 207
Anirudh Prasad Yadav v. Union of India, AIR 2004 All 123
M/S Prakash Jha Productions & Anr. V. Union of India & Ors, AIR 2011

BIBLIOGRAPHY

http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/media.htm
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/media
http://www.slideshare.net/devalrajpal/censor-board-for-movies-and-serials
http://www.slideshare.net/altacitglobal/the-cinematograph-act
http://lawinfowire.com/articleinfo/censorship-india-truth
http://www.slideshare.net/tatemode/censorship-in-media-by-terence-j-grant
http://www.slideshare.net/tatemode/censorship-in-media-by-terence-j-grant
http://www.slideshare.net/akashag11111/censorship-of-the-internet?
next_slideshow=2
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/keyword/censorship
http://www.targetgdpi.com/2014/03/media-censorship-good-or-bad.html
http://www.infojug.com/articles/reasons-for-media-censorship.html
http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-Censorship-in-the-media-necessary/1/
http://www.authorstream.com/Presentation/williamabbott-1554591-censorshipmedia/
http://www.ukessays.com/essays/media/historical-review-of-censor-restrictions-inindian-cinema-media-essay.php
https://indconlawphil.wordpress.com/tag/film-censorship-2/
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/media.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_India
http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=207160
http://www.vakilno1.com/bareacts/cinematograph/cinematograpghact.html
http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/65086/