Hearing a petition against movie Udta Punjab for allegedly portraying the state in a bad light by depicting the drug menace, the Punjab and Haryana High Court Monday ordered the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and the film producers to arrange a pre-release screening on June 14 for the court’s representative to analyse and submit a report. A vacation bench headed by Justice M Jeyapaul, on a petition filed by Jalandhar advocate Wattan Sharma, also issued a notice to the Centre, CBFC and film producer to show cause as to why the film, slated to be released on June 17, should not be restrained from public exhibition. [related-post] Watch Video: What's making news The court ordered CBFC and the film producer to screen the film Tuesday at CBFC’s theatre in Mumbai, at 4 pm, so that it could be viewed by the amicus curiae Sanjay N Kantawala and representatives of the petitioner, Centre, CBFC and the producer. The amicus curiae has been directed by the court to submit his report “fairly commenting on the content of the film” on June 16 so that the court could take a decision whether the film is fit for public exhibition. The petitioner, on the basis of several media reports, has submitted that the film has portrayed Punjab in a bad light and has done “negative branding” of Punjab and Punjabis, especially the Punjab youths. “If the film is released, it will have adverse repercussions all over Punjab,” argued the petitioner’s counsel Karan Bharihoke. During the arguments of the case, the court questioned the petitioner’s advocate, “Does the relief sought by you has direct bearing on the petition by producer before the Bombay High Court?” To this, Bharihoke replied, “Petition before the Bombay High Court relates to a challenge made by the producer against the inaction by the Revisional Committee of the CBFC, whereas the present petition has been filed challenging the content of the film on the ground that it was unfit for exhibition.” Sharma, in his petition, had sought directions for issuance of appropriate orders calling for the records and the unedited print of the film. The petitioner had submitted that the court should view the film to decide whether to permit public exhibition of the film and had sought directions to the Centre and CBFC not to issue any certificate for public exhibition during the pendency of his petition. The case has been adjourned for the next hearing on June 16.
