Shiban Khaibri
The liberals and the lovers of “creative art” are turning out to be increasingly more liberal and extensive art lovers. Blunting the scissors or clipping the wings of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) would be, therefore, construed by them as only vindication of their stand. Can there be no regulation, if not any sort of restriction on our individual “right” to see and watch anything publicly when such viewing gets converted into collective right, across the society? Let it first be analyzed as to the purpose of the CBFC in our country and its role. Cinematograph Act of 1952 makes CBFC a statutory body with censorship and classification powers to regulate the public exhibition of the films. It comes under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. Hence films including those on television can be publicly shown in India only after they are certified by the Board. The Board has an international standing in its own right in respect of the level of reasonable pruning, not censoring in the absolute sense, of the films certified for public viewing. CBFC being a statutory body or an organization of the government which is not demarcated or defined in the constitution of India and therefore, it gets its powers, service rules, authority and jurisdiction etc by an act of Parliament.
The Board came into extra ordinary limelight recently, due to its non agreement to certain scenes, dialogues and names in a film named as “Udta Punjab” which the producer of the said film claims is all about to highlight the menace of drugs and narcotic substances in Punjab. The Board’s present Chairperson Pahlaj Nihalani is considered to be somewhat of a puritan in certain sections of the society especially associated with what they conveniently call “The creative Art”. It is , therefore perceived that Nihalani is scissor happy more than certification happy chairperson . While Nihalani has his own arguments, he has been charged with a “sin” of being pro- BJP and some critics went to this extent so as to inflict an invective of a ” Modi Chamcha” . I have been mentioning in these columns occasionally about this phenomenon having unduly but very unfortunately, entered the faculty or instinct of criticism in many politicians from the opposition side as also among many “intellectuals and writers and critics” to immediately attack their object or victim with the “grave charge ” of being pro RSS and BJP and now in the instant case, the name of the Prime Minister too has been brought in , ie; Modi Chamcha. Nihalani was so much rained with this “grave “charge that he reacted either because of being tired of such accusations or daring those who wanted him to be in the stockings, “what if I am pro …… , Yes – I am Modi Chamcha…” Ravi Shanker Prasad, the Union Minister was quick to react in a sober way that Modi had no Chamchas and needed none. Before such an uncalled for accusation is questioned objectively, the point at issue is as to why in the course of discharging of his duties as the head of the Censor Board, Nihalani should face such an ire. If in his and his team’s opinion, certain scenes , dialogues or postures in a film are meriting editing and deserve to be cut or changed , it is a job required to be undertaken as expected of the Board members , where does the question of being the Chamcha of the Prime Minister arise? Being labeled pro- Modi notwithstanding, let it be made clear that whether it is the question of 21 MLAs of the Aa Aa Party, Kejriwal blames Modi for disapproval by the President of the bill passed by the Delhi Assembly to “legitimize” the appointment of 21 legislators as Parliamentary secretaries., whether it is the matter of raiding his office by the CBI in December 2015, Kejriwal called Modi names even declared him a psychopath. There are numerous instances where irrespective of the nature of issues, the present Prime Minister’s name is unnecessarily dragged. It did not happen earlier. Office, prestige, importance and the standing of the Indian Prime Minister should never be diluted, let alone ridiculed, disrespected or unfoundedly accused.
May be Nihalani might have had some sort of liking for the Prime Minister for whatever reasons but that does not make him earn the avoidable misnomer. While lot many debates in the media took place for the sake of the producer of the film Anurag Kashyap, none questioned the alleged reports of lineage of the interests of Aa Aa Party in the film in as much as the reports being there about the film in question having been indirectly funded by the Party to project Punjab in very bad light to discredit the present coalition government there and perhaps reap electoral harvests in the ensuing assembly elections. Unfortunately, such a scenario has become order of the political morality in our country. If the Board desired some visual cuts and mutes, it must have been warranted by reasons of not showing the border sensitive state in a bad light and not project its brave, honest, hard working people especially the young people, in poor pathetic light. Well, the Film has been ordered by the Bombay High Court to be released with just one cut and the film has been released irrespective of the legal right to the Board or for that matter to any organization, social, cultural or religious to approach the apex court of the country. The point is not as to why the producer of the film chose Punjab where the trend of taking to drugs by a large number of the people has been on a slight rise and why not make the film against the drug abuse itself without naming a state in particular. And the case of Punjab is not as precarious as that of Malda , West Bengal which has earned the nickname as India’s Afghanistan as that area, Kalaichak, Gopalganj, Malda is now openly cultivating opium poppy, is a den of distribution and sale of drugs and narcotics, manufacture and sale of illegal arms, counterfeit currency and other criminal activities.
As is often observed, the proceeds of drugs sale is, the most sought after source, to finance terror and related crime by the enemies of the country. In these conditions, Udta Malda should have better been shown instead of Udta Punjab but because of “various reasons” as can be deduced, Punjab was brought into the focus. If sincerity and honesty to show the horrors of drugs and the message to stay away from the menace would have been the sole motif of the producer, there would have been no mention of a place by name. Censor Board must have been driven by such an opinion.
A trend has set in and of late, it has scored more ascendancy in certain elite and “progressive” circles of the society and that is -the feeling about the Censor Board unnecessarily behaving as antidote of the “Creative Art” . By that, they perhaps mean that scenes depicting sadistic pleasures, obscenity, sensuousness, vulgarity, violence, nudity as also below the belt dialogues, songs with “double” meaning should not be censored. To circumvent or to mitigate the effect of such exercise by the Censor Board, very often certain controversies and unfounded victimhood in the name of “suppression of creative art” is enacted to ensure that the viewership be more in the created air of suspense. And Udta Punjab has really made an “Udan” in the sky as it garnered on its first day as much as Rs. 10 crore thanks to controversies which helped pulling the audiences to the theatres. Now it is to be seen how much earning from this film shall go towards treatment and rehabilitation of drug addicts and if there shall be none, then it is tantamount to a situation where one warms ones hands from the warmth of the neighbour’s house on fire.
Newer levels of cheap creative art are sought to be touched as a film titled “Haraamkhor” showing illicit relations between a teacher and a student is boasted to be shown all in the “servitude” of the “creative art”. The CBFC has shown its non inclination to “certify” the film on the ground perhaps that we in our society accord highest respect to a teacher or a Guru. A teacher and a student are like a mother and a son or a father and a daughter.
The producer of the film is the same “lover” of creative art as that of “Udta Punjab”. He is sore about the Board and has approached Appellate Tribunal. We revere teachers in India. If the same approach towards the efficacy and the purpose of the CBFC remains , a day will fast approach when porn movies , lewd TV serials etc; shall all be demanded in the name of respecting the creative art and unhindered right to expression which means winding down of the CBFC as it shall then be rendered redundant.
feedbackexcelsior@gmail.com
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel