Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 4]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Raksha Jyoti Foundation vs Union Of India And Ors on 2 March, 2016

Author: Rajesh Bindal

Bench: Rajesh Bindal

                                                                         VARINDER SINGH
                                                                         2016.03.09 17:00
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA                       I attest to the accuracy and integrity
                                                                         of this document
                                                                         Punjab & Haryana High Court at
                        AT CHANDIGARH                                    Chandigarh




                                       CWP No. 1322 of 2016 (O&M)


Raksha Jyoti Foundation                                      .. Petitioner
                                    versus
Union of India and others                                    .. Respondents


Coram:         Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal


Present:       Mr. Munish Kumar, Advocate, for the petitioner.
               Mr. Chetan Mittal, Senior Advocate with
               Mr. Vivek Singla, Advocate, for respondent nos. 1 to 4.
               Mr. Anupam Bansal, Advocate, for respondent no. 6.
               Mr. Amit Singh Sethi and Ms. Jyoti Munday, Advocates,
               for respondent no.8.

Rajesh Bindal, J.

In terms of the previous order passed, today affidavit of Shri Raju S. Vaidya on behalf of respondent no. 2 - Central Board of Film Certification, Mumbai, dated 27.2.2016, has been filed in Court and the same is taken on record. It has been stated therein that to ensure that no content in movie is released, which had been deleted from the final print approved, an undertaking shall be taken from the Producers and the Directors, and for any violation they shall be responsible. It is further stated in the affidavit that the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, constituted a committee headed by Shri Shyam Benegal to evolve broad guidelines/ procedures under the Cinematograph Act,1952. The Committee has also invited suggestions from the public for betterment of film certification process.

Considering the aforesaid facts where apparently the Government is taking effective steps in the matter, no further orders are required to be passed in the present writ petition. The same is accordingly disposed of.


2.3.2016                                               (Rajesh Bindal)
vs                                                           Judge