The Delhi High Court on Thursday refused to entertain the two public interest litigation (PIL) petitions against Paresh Rawal-starrer movie The Taj Story which is slated for release tomorrow.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said that the Court is not the "Super Censor Board" and that different people may have different takes on the history.
"We are not a super censor board... You want a disclaimer saying this is not history. Tell me, in any work of fiction, whether the author puts a disclaimer that this is not history? Even for history, two historians may have different views, but which historian's view is correct, is this something to be decided by us? What are the standards available to us to decide this?" the Court remarked.
The Bench said that the petitioners did not do proper research before filing the plea.
It added that actor Paresh Rawal should not have been made a party to the petition.
"Why have you made the actor (Paresh Rawal) a party? If tomorrow you file a contempt, would you make the lawyer a party? He [Rawal] is a professional actor, he is not responsible for the content," the Court said.
After hearing the case for some time, the Bench said that the petitioner may approach the Central government with his grievance.
Central Government Standing Counsel (CGSC) Ashish Dixit appeared for the Union of India and stated that none of the petitioners had made any representations before the government.
The Court ultimately allowed the petitioners to withdraw their petitions and approach the Central government under Section 6 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952.
"In case any revision is filed before the Central government, the same shall be decided expeditiously," the Court ordered.
It also asked the petitioners to remove Rawal's name from the memo of parties.
Even for history, two historians may have different views, but which historian's view is correct, is this something to be decided by us?Delhi High Court
The High Court was dealing with two public interest litigation (PIL) petitions alleging that the film presents fabricated and provocative content regarding the Taj Mahal’s origins, asserting a perspective that is contrary to established history and scholarly consensus.
While one of the petitions was filed by advocate Shakeel Abbas, the other was by Chetna Gautam.
In his plea, Abbas sought a direction to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to review the certificate granted to the film or make the required cuts to protect the communal harmony in the country. It also demanded that the movie must contain a disclaimer that it is dealing with a contested narrative.
Abbas argued that the film’s speculative assertions could erode faith in historical scholarship, provoke communal unrest, and damage the international reputation of the Taj Mahal, a UNESCO World Heritage Site
“That it is indicated that the movie contains deeply divisive scenes that could provoke communal tensions and disturb peace in society. That the film has amplified controversial statements time to time by the BJP leaders and other Hindutva Organizations, which may spark communal unrest nationwide,” his plea stated.
[Read Live Coverage]