BANARSI DEVI JAIN Vs. M P TRANSPORT COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner carries on inter alia the business of distribution of feature films and claims to be the sole distributor of the Hindi feature film "jodha Akbar". The case of the petitioner in the writ petition is that the film "jodha akbar" was cleared by the Central Board of film Certification (for short 'the Board') and a Class U/a Certification was issued by the board on 6-2-2008. Thereafter, the film "jodha Akbar" was put up for public screening in the theatres throughout the State of madhya Pradesh and was being screened in about 30 theatres in the cities and towns of madhya Pradesh when the Government of madhya Pradesh issued an order dated 22-2-2008 suspending the screening of the film throughout the State of Madhya Pradesh with immediate effect. Aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated 22-2-2008. The petitioner has also prayed for an interim order for staying the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 22-2-2008.

(2.) MR. Kishore Shrivastava, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that under Entry 60 of List I of the Seventh schedule read with read with Article 246 of the Constitution Parliament has power to make law on the subject "sanctioning of cinematograph films for exhibition" and in exercise of this power, Parliament has made the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (for short 'the central Act of 1952') and Section 5a of the central Act of 1952 provides for certification of films by the Board of Film Censors. He submitted that sub-section (3) of Section 5a provides that a certificate granted by the Board under this section shall be valid throughout India for a period of ten years subject to the other provisions of the Act. He argued that since the film "jodha Akbar" has been certified by the Board under Section 5a of the Central Act of 1952, the petitioner had right to have the film exhibited throughout country including the State of madhya Pradesh. He submitted that the only provision of the Central Act of 1952 under which the exhibition of the film once certified under Section 5a of the Act can be suspended is Section 13 of the Central Act of 1952 under which power has been vested in the authorities mentioned therein to suspend the exhibition of the film in a State, part of district, as the case may be. He submitted that Section 13 of the Central Act of 1952 however is not applicable to States but to Union territories as would be clear from sub-section (1) of Section 13 of the Central Act of 1952.

(3.) MR. Shrivastava next submitted that the State Legislature has also the power under entry 33 of List II of Seventh Schedule read with Article 246 of the Constitution to make laws on cinemas subject to provisions of Entry 60 of List I and in exercise of such power the State Legislature of Madhya pradesh has made the Madhya Pradesh cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1952 (for short 'the state Act of 1952' ). He submitted that section 6 (1) of the State Act of 1952 which empowers the State Government and the District Magistrate to suspend exhibition of a film in any place in the area specified in an order which has been certified under Section 5a of the Central Act of 1952 is inconsistent with the provisions of Central Act of 1952 and is therefore void.