Unfair To Direct Uniform Pricing Of Cinema Tickets Regardless Of Location & Facilities Of Theatre : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha disapproved mandate for uniform pricing of cinema tickets. The bench opined that it would be unfair for same rate to be charged on every theatre irrespective of the location of the theatre in the facilities provided in the said theatre. 

The issue arose in an appeal filed against a judgement of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court which directed that the Licensing Authority/every District Magistrate in the State was to ensure proper uniformity be maintained with respect to the sale price of tickets in all the cinemas of the State in terms of Rule 87(i) & (ii) of the Jammu & Kashmir Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1975. The judgement had also directed Multiplexes/Cinema Halls Owners of the State of J&K not to prohibit cinema goers/viewers from carrying his/her own food articles and water inside the theatre. The Supreme Court bench overturned the judgement and stated that a cinema hall owner could prohibit movie-goers from carrying their own food and beverages inside cinema halls.

Senior Advocate KV Vishwanathan with Abhinav Shrivastava AoR, appearing for appellants then highlighted the issue with the third direction of the impugned judgment of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court which directed uniformity in sale prices of tickets. The direction of the High Court was this : "The Government of J&K as well as Licensing Authority/every District Magistrate in the State is directed to ensure proper uniformity be maintained with respect to the sale price of tickets in all the cinemas of the State in terms of Rule 87(i) & (ii) of the Jammu & Kashmir Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1975".

Rule 87 of Jammu & Kashmir Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1975 stated–

"The licensing authority shall ensure that the sale price of tickets in all cinemas of the state holding licence under these rules is uniform."

Vishwanathan highlighted that up till now the direction was implemented as per segment wise uniformity. For instance, those sitting in the balcony would be charged the same rate, AC theatres would charge their own rates, and non-AC theatres would have separate rates. He stated–

"Now it should not be unequal. Tomorrow if they enforce it among unequals, then it would be wrong. Your lordships will have to read this as equality amongst equals."

CJI Chandrachud while clarifying the meaning of the Rule stated–

"What this means is that two different cinemas should not have discriminatory rates. But within the cinema hall the balcony can certainly charge more. Suppose there is a non-AC cinema, there will be difference. I will give you an example. Let's say Delhi, can you say that the same rate must be charged in every theatre irrespective of the location of the theatre? Can you say that a multiplex would charge the same rate as some cinema hall which provides just basic services? What we will do is, we will say that there was no challenge to rule 87. Therefore rule 87 as it stands will be enforced in accordance with law." 

Accordingly, the court stated that since the validity of the Rule 87 was not in challenge before the High Court, the rule will have to be interpreted and enforced as it stands. The bench added–

"The above direction of the High Court shall not be construed as imposing any requirement over and above the rule."

CASE TITLE: K.C. CINEMA  v. THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS and connected matters. | SLP(C) No. 20784/2018