New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday heard submissions in a plea seeking to halt the release of the film ‘Udaipur Files’, with the petitioner arguing that the film may prejudice the right to a fair trial of one of the accused in the Kanhaiya Lal murder case.

A division bench comprising Justices Devendra Kumar Upadhyay and Tushar Rao Gedela is set to continue hearing arguments from Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Chetan Sharma on Friday, August 1.

The petition was filed on behalf of Mohd Javed, an accused in the 2022 Udaipur murder case, who is currently out on bail. Senior advocate Menaka Guruswamy, representing Javed along with advocate Pyoli, contended that the film’s release could jeopardise Javed’s right to a fair trial, as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

At the outset, Guruswamy argued that the film, which is based primarily on the charge sheet, effectively pronounces guilt before judicial determination. She maintained that this amounts to contempt of court, as the case remains sub judice.

The petitioner’s counsel also cited a Kerala High Court ruling involving a crime-based television serial, asserting that no content based on an ongoing trial should be broadcast until a verdict is delivered.

Guruswamy further stated that the film reproduces dialogues directly from the charge sheet, turning legal documents into a script, and thereby influencing public perception. “Even if based on true events, fiction must not interfere with ongoing judicial processes,” she submitted.

Referring to the Cinematograph Act, she highlighted Section 6, which outlines the Central government’s limited revisional powers: to alter the category of certification, suspend the certificate, or revoke it entirely. She argued that the Centre had exceeded its legal jurisdiction by directing cuts and changes to the film.

In response, ASG Chetan Sharma defended the government’s actions, stating that it had acted within its legal authority in reviewing the Central Board of Film Certification’s (CBFC) decision. Sharma noted that both parties were invited to preview the film, and concerns were duly addressed. He also clarified that a fresh CBFC certificate had not been issued, as the matter is pending before the High Court.

The bench, however, questioned the Centre’s exact role under Section 6(2) of the Cinematograph Act. “Tell us which clause your order falls under,” the court asked, stressing that the government can only issue one of three specific types of orders while exercising its revisional powers.

The judges observed that the government appeared to be functioning as an appellate body over the CBFC, which is not authorised by the statute.

The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on August 1, during which the ASG is expected to respond in detail to the court’s queries. A separate petition filed by Maulana Arshad Madani, which could not be heard on Wednesday due to the senior counsel’s absence, is also set to be taken up on the same date.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ANI inputs