From Reels to Restrictions: Decoding India’s Movie Ban Laws

From Reels to Restrictions: Decoding India’s Movie Ban Laws. Cinema in India is not just a form of entertainment—it is a powerful medium that often stirs public emotion, reflects societal issues, and challenges political and cultural narratives. Given this power, the regulation and censorship of films have always been contentious subjects. While the Indian Constitution guarantees the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a), this right is not absolute. It is subject to “reasonable restrictions” under Article 19(2), and this legal basis allows the government to impose bans or restrictions on films under certain circumstances.

1. Legal Framework for Movie Certification and Ban

a. The Cinematograph Act, 1952

The principal legislation governing films in India is the Cinematograph Act, 1952. It empowers the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to certify films for public exhibition. The CBFC can:

• Certify films for unrestricted public exhibition (U/A or A categories),

• Direct modifications or cuts before certification,

• Or refuse certification altogether.

Under Section 5B(1) of the Act, the CBFC may deny certification to a film if 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.

b. Article 19(2) of the Constitution

This constitutional provision provides the state with the power to impose reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech and expression in the interests of public order, morality, or state security. Films that provoke communal tension, offend religious sentiments, or contain obscene content may be restricted or banned under this clause.

c. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023

• Section 194 – Promoting Enmity Between Groups

(Previously Section 153A IPC)

This section penalizes acts that promote enmity between different groups on grounds such as religion, race, language, caste, or community, and those that disturb public tranquillity. Movies that depict content capable of instigating communal tensions or hostility may attract action under this section.

For example, a film that portrays one religious community in a derogatory manner may face legal action under Section 194 BNS.

• Section 198 – Acts Outraging Religious Feelings

(Previously Section 295A IPC)

This section penalizes deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class of citizens. It is often invoked when movies depict gods, scriptures, or religious customs in a way perceived as disrespectful.

For example, legal complaints filed against films for mocking or misrepresenting religious practices would now be examined under Section 198 BNS.

• Section 181 – Sale or Distribution of Obscene Material

(Previously Section 292 IPC)

This section penalizes the sale, distribution, public exhibition, or circulation of any material deemed obscene. Films containing scenes or dialogues considered sexually explicit or offensive to public decency may fall under this provision.

For example, objectionable or explicit scenes in films, if not edited or censored properly, could invite legal proceedings under Section 181 BNS.

d. Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973

Under Section 95 of the CrPC, state governments can order the forfeiture of any publication (including films) which appears to violate the provisions of the IPC, such as promoting enmity or sedition. This is often used to impose temporary or permanent bans.

2. Types of Bans and Restrictions on Films

a. CBFC Refusal to Certify

If the CBFC refuses to certify a film, it effectively cannot be released in theaters. However, filmmakers can appeal to the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) (now dissolved in 2021 and replaced by high courts under the Tribunal Reforms Act).

b. State-Imposed Bans

State governments often invoke public order as a reason to ban the screening of a film, even after it has received CBFC clearance. This was seen in cases like:

• Padmaavat (2018): Several states attempted to ban the film citing potential law and order issues, but the Supreme Court overturned the bans.

• The Kerala Story (2023): Tamil Nadu and West Bengal imposed bans citing public unrest, sparking debates over federalism and censorship.

c. Court-Ordered Injunctions

Courts can order a stay on the release of a film, especially if a party alleges defamation or infringement of intellectual property. Injunctions are commonly sought in biopics or politically sensitive films.

3. Controversies and Judicial Stance

The judiciary has played a crucial role in protecting freedom of expression in cinema:

• K.A. Abbas v. Union of India (1970): The Supreme Court upheld pre-censorship but emphasized the need for clear guidelines.

• S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram (1989): The Court ruled that freedom of expression cannot be suppressed unless there is a direct threat to public order.

• Prakash Jha Productions v. Union of India (2011): The Bombay High Court reiterated that once the CBFC certifies a film, states cannot arbitrarily ban it.

In Padmaavat, the Supreme Court ruled that law and order is the state’s responsibility and that freedom of expression cannot be stifled by threats of violence.

4. OTT Platforms and Regulatory Gaps

With the rise of streaming platforms, content regulation has become more complex. As of now, OTT content is governed by the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, which introduced a three-tier grievance redressal mechanism but did not create a formal censorship board for digital content. However, OTT shows and films are increasingly facing litigation and demands for bans, leading to calls for clearer legal frameworks.

5. Conclusion

From Reels to Restrictions: Decoding India’s Movie Ban Laws. Movie bans in India lie at the intersection of art, politics, law, and public sentiment. While it’s vital to safeguard the constitutional right to freedom of expression, it is equally important to maintain social harmony and public order. The challenge lies in balancing these interests without allowing censorship to become a tool for political convenience or moral policing. Courts have often championed artistic freedom, but the real change will come when society at large accepts differing viewpoints and artistic liberties.

In a thriving democracy like India, cinema should be a medium that sparks dialogue, not silences it.

Stay tuned on our website, as if any official information pops up then we will update you in minutes! If you want all the latest updates on time, then join our student community on WhatsApp!

Choose the right career yourself by booking personal guidance from professionals on Mytagapp.com