Cinematograph Act of 1952
Film certification and censorship in India
Established the Central board for film certification
Statutory body
Under ministry of information and
broadcasting
Head quartered in Mumbai
Members of the committee are appointed by the central
government inc Chairman.
• Justice Mukul Mudgal, 2013 – To examine the issues of certification under the Cinematograph Act, 1952.
• Shri Shyam Benegal Committee in 2016
- To evolve broad guidelines for film certification within the ambit of the
Cinematograph Act and Rules. - • With that consultation the ministry has
proposed to introduce the
Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill, 2021. - • Up for public consultati
• Age-based categories:
‘Unrestricted public exhibition’ category is
proposed to be amended
Film category
“U” – unrestricted public exhibition
“A” – restricted to adult audiences
“UA” – unrestricted public exhibition subject to parental guidance for children below the age of twelve
“S” – Restricted to a special class of audience.
• Draft bill proposes to further sub-divide the
existing UA category into age-based categories –
U/A 7+, U/A 13+ and U/A 16+
• Amendment of sub-section (3) of section 5A – ‘Validity of certificate’
Act of 1952 – certificate issued by the CBFC is valid for 10 years
Amendment – certificate will be valid in
perpetuity.
• Adding sub-section(1) of section 6 – when the Central government received any
complaints for violation of section 5B(1) on any film that is already certified by CBFC –
in that case the Central government may ask
the chairman of the CBFC to reconsider the certification.
• Film piracy – insertion of section 6AA:
Piracy rose 62% in India in the last week of March 2020 compared to the last week of February 2020 following the
COVID lockdowns.
Cinematograph Act, 1952 – No provision
to check privacy
Prohibits unauthorised recording
Prescribes punishment – imprisonment for
minimum of three months and maximum
of three years, fines the individual with
minimum of Rs 3 lakhs.
Criticism
• An attempt by union government o act as a “super censor” body.
SC in K.M. Shankarappa vs Union of India, 2000 case – Union government
cannot exercise revision powers on films that are already certified by the CBFC
Despite the SC judgement, this is an attempt to add another layer to quell
freedom of expression through films
Government scraped the existence of Film Certificate Appellate Tribunal
(FCAT) through an ordinance. (A body to hear appeals of film-makers against decisions of the CBFC)
Conclusion

A way to stifle free speech as expressed
through films. And that is why this draft
bill is being criticised


































You must be logged in to post a comment.