CBFC Can't Deny Certification Without Specifying Objectionable Portions :Madras High Court On Vetrimaaran's Tamil Film 'Manushi'

The Madras High Court, on Wednesday, criticized the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for denying certificate to upcoming Tamil movie "Manushi" without specifying the scenes to which it has objections.

Noting that movie making was a part of right to free speech and expression, Justice Anand Venkatesh said that the Board would be putting the producers of the movie in great difficulty by not specifying the scenes to which it has objections.

"Making a movie is a part of the right to speech and expression. As such, the filmmakers are already suffering from a lot of difficulties. You cannot deny certification for an entire movie without specifying the objectionable portions and expect a filmmaker to shoot the entire movie afresh," the court said. 

The court thus asked the Board to list out the objectionable scenes or in the alternative, to sit and watch the movie with its producers and point out the objectionable scenes. The Court asked the counsel for CBFC to take instructions and adjourned the case by a week. 

The court was hearing a petition filed by film director Vetri Maaran, whose production company Grassroot Film Company has produced the film in question. 

Maaran submitted that he had submitted an application for certification on September 11, 2024, but after screening the movie, the Regional Officer, CBFC, refused to certify the movie without providing any opportunity for personal hearing. 

Maaran further submitted that following the refusal, the movie was sent to the Revising Committee. he informed that the revising committee too, recommended not to certify the movie stating that it was against the integrity of the State, contemptuous of certain community group and defaming the policies of the Government. Maaran added that the Review Committee's refusal was without any personal hearing. 

Maaran submitted that the procedure adopted by the Board was not in accordance with the provisions of the Cinematograph Act. He added that the blanket reason for refusal was manifestly arbitrary, untenable and not in accordance with the spirit of the country. Maaran also contended that the blanket order by the Board was nothing but an administrative ban imposed unreasonably that violated his right to trade and occupation.

Maaran also expressed his willingness to edit the objectionable scenes and dialogues if the same exceeded his right to expression guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution. He thus sought directions to the regional officer to consider his representation and to issue a speaking order after re-examining the movie. 

Case Title: Vetri Maaran v. The Chairman, CBFC and Another

Case No: WP 18036 of 2025