Petition Misplaced, Bereft Of Material: Madras High Court In Plea Seeking To Revoke U/A Certificate For Rajnikanth-Starrer 'Jailer'

The Madras High Court on Friday orally remarked that the plea seeking to revoke the U/A Certificate issued for the Rajnikanth-starrer film "Jailer" was misplaced and bereft of public interest. The court also remarked that the plea appeared to be publicity interest litigation.

Division bench of Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice PD Audikesavalu dismissed the plea as withdrawn.

The Petitioner, ML Ravi, an advocate by profession had approached the court claiming that the movie, which had been given a “UA Certificate” by the Central Board of Film Certificate, thus allowing children below 12 years of age to watch the movie with their parent’s guidance, is in fact vulnerable to the youth and children, given the violent actions depicted in the film.

When the case was taken up today, the bench asked the petitioner how many days it had been since the movie's release. When it was informed that the movie was released on August 10th, the court wondered what was the point of continuing the plea when lakhs of children would have already seen the movie within the past 15 days.

The petitioner, however, strongly resisted the U/A certificate claiming that the movie had a lot of violent scenes that could corrupt young minds. To this, the court remarked that every film contains some violence and how could one examine whether violence was more or less in a particular movie. The court also asked the petitioner what the difference between a "U Certificate" and a "U/A Certificate" is. To this, it was submitted that while there was no restriction for viewing a movie with a "U Certificate", parental supervision is necessary for children below 12 years in a movie with a "U/A Certificate".

Ravi had contended that though there is freedom of speech and expression guaranteed in society when the freedom of expression is intrinsically dangerous to the public interest, restrictions can be imposed. Relying upon a study conducted by the American Academy of Paediatrics, he had argued that violence in movies has tripled and that exposing people especially children and youth to violent behaviors in films increases the likelihood that they behave aggressively afterwards.

He also submitted that though the movie is given a “UA certificate” in India, in the UK, and the USA the same movie is given an “A” certificate allowing only adults to watch the movie as it incites large violence. He stated that the Certification by the Board is unjust and not legal. It overrules Section 5 of the Cinematographic Act 1952, it is argued.

Thus, he had requested the court to quash the Certificate issued by the Board to the film and also sought to stay the exhibition of the movie to the public till the final disposal of the case.

Case Title: ML Ravi v Chairman and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 243

Case No: WP 25134 of 2023