Bombay HC Dismisses Plea To Ban Engagement Of Pakistani Artists In India; Says Patriotism Is In Devotion To Country, Not Enmity Towards Another
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition seeking a complete ban on Indian citizens, companies, and associations from engaging Pakistani artists, including actors, singers, musicians, lyricists, and technicians.A division bench of Justice Sunil B Shukre and Justice Firdosh P Pooniwalla observed that the petition is a “retrograde step in promoting cultural harmony, unity and...
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition seeking a complete ban on Indian citizens, companies, and associations from engaging Pakistani artists, including actors, singers, musicians, lyricists, and technicians.
A division bench of Justice Sunil B Shukre and Justice Firdosh P Pooniwalla observed that the petition is a “retrograde step in promoting cultural harmony, unity and peace, and has no merit in it.”
“A person who is good at heart would welcome in his country any activity which promotes peace, harmony, and tranquility within the country and across the border, Arts, music, sports, culture, dance and so on are the activities which rise above nationalities, cultures and nations and truly bring about peace, tranquility, unity and harmony in nation and between nations”, the court observed.
The petition filed by a cine worker, sought directions to the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, the Ministry of External Affairs, and the Ministry of Home Affairs for issuance of appropriate notifications imposing a ban and prohibiting the granting of visas to Pakistani artists.
The petitioner, in his plea, highlighted the resolution passed by the All-Indian Cine Workers Association (AICWA) after the Pulwama terror attacks, and similar resolutions by the Indian Motion Pictures Producers Association (IMPPA), and the Federation of Western Indian Cine Employees (FWICE), which banned Pakistani artists from the Indian film industry. The MNS Cinema Wing also cautioned filmmakers against hiring Pakistani artists, the plea stated.
Advocate Vibhav Krishna for the petitioner contended that allowing Pakistani artists to work in India could lead to discrimination against Indian artists as the favourable environment available to Pakistani artists in India is not available to Indian artists in Pakistan. The ban is necessary to prevent the exploitation of commercial opportunities by Pakistani artists in India, which could potentially deprive Indian artists of similar opportunities, he argued.
However, the court deemed the petitioner's stance as misplaced, emphasizing the need for cultural harmony and peace between nations. The court emphasized that patriotism should not breed hostility but rather should promote unity and cultural exchanges.
“One must understand that in order to be a patriot, one need not be inimical to those from abroad especially, from the neighboring country. A true patriot is a person who is selfless, who is devoted to cause of his country, which he cannot be, unless he is a person who is good at heart”, said the court.
Further, the court underscored that the resolutions by private associations lacked statutory force and could not be enforced through judicial orders. The court emphasized that enforcing such bans would contravene the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution.
The court also observed that the "positive steps" taken by the Indian government in promoting international peace and security, such as allowing the Pakistani cricket team to participate in the World Cricket Cup held in India, would be undermined if such petitions are entertained.
"the World Cricket Cup being held in India, Cricket team from Pakistan is taking part and this has happened only because of appreciable positive steps taken by the Government of India in the interest of overall peace and harmony in consonance with Article 51 of the Constitution of India which is about promotion of international peace and security. If such a petition is to be entertained by this Court, it would set as at naught the positive initiatives taken by the Government of India in the interest of international peace and harmony", the court observed.
The court concluded that the petitioner's prayers for framing policy directions were beyond its scope, as it cannot direct the government or the legislature to frame policies in a particular manner. Thus, the petition was dismissed.
Advocates Vibhav Krishna, Anmol B, and Tahir P i/by Juris Consillis represented the petitioner.
Advocate Rui Rodrigues represented the Central Government.
Government Pleader PH Kantharia along with AGP Manish Upadhye represented the State.
Case no. – Writ Petition (L) No. 28838 of 2023
Case Title – Faaiz Anwar Qureshi v. Union of India and Ors.