'Udta' may not give wings to Tolly

Kolkata: The Bombay high court's one-cut verdict on 'Udta Punjab' seems to have sparked a glimmer of hope among fimmakers that the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) might show leniency for sex, slangs and controversies in their films. CBFC officials in Kolkata made it clear it might be a little too early to rejoice, but filmmakers can always cite the order as a "reference" or "precedent" in case of dispute.

The Cinematograph Act, 1952, has provisions where the CBFC can "direct the applicant to carry out such excisions or modifications in the film as it thinks necessary before sanctioning it for public exhibition under any of the foregoing clauses" as well as "refuse to sanction the film for public exhibition". Simply put, the Act, till it is amended, gives the power to CBFC to decide whether or not a film can be released.

So, what can now happen if a Bengali film on a controversial issue asks for certification? Will the board be more guarded about suggesting cuts and beeps? Amitabh Chakraborty, director of 'Cosmic Sex', who accepted 33 changes suggested by CBFC before his film got an A certificate, is still hoping and expecting CBFC to tone down. "The CBFC guidelines are quite subjective. After the 'Udta Punjab' verdict, I'm hoping the interpretation will now be in favour of makers,"

Chakraborty

said.

But Advocate

Tamal Mukherjee

is of the opinion that the verdict of the Bombay high court should have a bearing only on matters related to 'Udta Punjab'. "I've not read the verdict though this is how it usually works,"

Mukherjee

said. Echoing him, Advocate

Soumya Ray Chowdhury

said, "This can be taken as a reference point, but each case has to be judged by its own facts and circumstances."

According to Advocate

Mala Duttaghosh

, who is a member of the advisory panel of CBFC, the Bombay high court verdict "is not binding upon cases referred to the Kolkata office of CBFC". "I'll be guided by the statutory law of the land and will judge Bengali films, keeping the existing CBFC guidelines in mind,"

Duttaghosh

said.

But she suggested that it's time to throw open a debate. "The debate could be if the court ought to substitute the view of a statutory body (CBFC) until and unless the decision of the film certification board entrenches upon the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression. A discussion is necessary on if any statutory power can be taken away by the judiciary till its repeal by the

Parliament

, which passed its legislature. We also need to discuss if any applicant can directly approach the judiciary without exhausting the proper forum (examining committee, revising committee and then

Film Certification Administrative Tribunal

(FCAT)," Duttaghosh said.