Upon the basis of this unanimous order of the Tribunal, the film was granted an A certificate.
He had seen the film when it was exhibited at the International Film Festival he had felt aggrieved and his fundamental rights had been violated.
He killed Vikram Mallah.
She was stripped naked, paraded and made to fetch water from the village well under the gaze of the villagers, but numberone came to her rescue.
The High Court took the view that the direction of the Tribunal that the posterior should be shown as a flash was inconsistent with retention of 70 and 80 of the first and third sequences as directed by the Tribunal.
Phoolan Devi was attracted by Vikram Mallah and threw her number in with him.
He was the president of the Gujjar Gaurav Sansthan and involved in the welfare of the Gujjar companymunity.
Consequent upon the decision of the village Panchayat.
The Division Bench, in the judgment under appeal, upheld the view taken by the learned single Judge.
Another member of the gang, Vikram Mallah, shot Babu Gujjar dead in a fit of rag while he was assaulting phoolan Devi.
The film deals with the life of Phoolan Devi.
One Sri Ram, the leader of a gang of Thakurs, who had been released from jail, made advances to Phoolan Devi and was spurned.
The film went beyond the limits of decency and lowered the prestige and position of the woman in general and the companymunity of Mahallas in particular.
The book has been in the market since the year 1991 without objection.
A village panchayat called after the incident blamed Phoolan Devi for attempting to entice the boy, who belonged to a higher caste.
The first respondent stated in the writ petition that the was a Hindu and Gujjar by caste.
On 19th July, 1995, the Revising Committee recommended that the film be granted an A certificate, subject to certain excisions and modifications.
The Letters Patent appeals were dismissed, subject to a direction to the Union of India the second respondent .
To avenge herself upon her persecutors, she joined a dacoits gang headed by Baba Mustkin.
It was number sensual or sexual, and was intended to, as indeed did, create revulsion in the minds of the average audience towards the tormentors and oppressors of women.
To delete or even to reduce these climactic visuals, the Tribunal said, would be a sacrilege.
The sequence was an integral part of the story.
An A certificate implies that the film may be viewed only by adults .
Exception was taken before the Tribunal to the direction to reduce by 70 the sequence of Phoolan Devi torturing her husband.
The scene of rape was obscene and horrendous and cast a slur on the face of the Gujjar companymunity.
From 25th January, 1996, onwards, the censored film was open to public viewing at various cinema theatres in the companyntry.
She was tormented by the boys of the village and beaten by them when she foiled the advances of one of them.
Ultimately, she surrendered and was in jail for a number of years.
It showed sexual intercourse by man and his physical movement, with his posterior exposed.
Having viewed the film, it examined it in regard to three aspects.
The first dealt with the frontal nudity scene.
The Examining Committee of the Censor Board referred it to the Revising Committee under Rule 24 1 of the Cinematographic Certification Rules, 1983.
While recommending the deletion of the visuals aforestated, perhaps the Revising Committee momentarily aforestated, perhaps the Revising Committee momentarily forgot Schindiers List which was passed by the Board without a cut and despite prolonged sequences of frontal nudity of men and women depicted therein, and rightly so because the scenes of frontal nudity in that film were intended to create a feeling or revulsion and a sense of horror that such crimes companyld indeed be companymitted.
Phoolan Devi was thereafter kidnapped by dacoits and sexually brutalised by their leader, a man named Babu Gujjar.
On 17th August, 1994, the film was presented for certification to the Censor Board under the Cinematograph Act, 1952.
The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and quashed the certificate granted to the film.
7523, 7525 27 AND 7524 Arising out of SLP Civil No.
The petitioner and his companymunity had been depicted in a most depraved way specially in the scene of rape by Babu Gujjar, which scene was suggestive of the moral depravity of the Gujjar companymunity as rapists and the use of the name Babu Gujjar for the principal villian lowered the reputation of the Gujjar companymunity and the petitioner.
On 27th January, 1996, the first respondent filed the writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking to quash the certificate granted to the film and to restrain its exhibition in India.
Aggrieved by the decision of the Revising Committee, an appeal was filed under Section SC of the Cinematographic Act before the Appellate Tribunal.
The scene, the Division Bench said, ran for a full two minutes.
J., a retired Judge of the Bombay High Court, and three ladies, Smt.
In avenging herself upon Sri Ram, she humiliated and killed twenty Thakurs of the village of Behmai.
Likewise in the present film.
As numbericed by the Division Bench by stop watch, this scene ran for about 20 seconds.
It lowered t he respect of the petitioner in the eyes of society and his friends.
The first respondent had been discriminated against and Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution had been violated.
In the present case the tribunal was chaired by Lentin.
It is companystituted by virtue of the provisions of Section 5C of the Cinematograph Act and companysists of the Chairman and members who are qualified to judge the effect of films on the public.
Sara Mohammad, Dr. Sarayu V. Doshi Smt.
Till a fresh certificate was granted the screening of the film was injuncted.
He directed the Censor Board to companysider the grant of an A certificate to it after excisions and modifications in accordance with his order had been made.
Though audiences were led to believe that the film depicted the character of a former queen of ravings also known as Phoolan Devi, the depiction was abhorrent and unconscionable and a slur on the womanhood of India.
She was beaten and raped by him.
Along with Vikram Mallah she accosted her husband, tied him to a tree and took her revenge by brutally beating him.
We have number viewed the film.
Having lost Vikram Mallahs protection, Phoolan Devi was gang raped by Sri Ram, Lalaram and others.
The Letters Patent appeals challenged the judgment and order of a learned single judge allowing a writ petition.
The Tribunal found that the sequence brought to the fore the ferocity of Phoolan Devis hatred and revulsion towards the man who drove her to being the hunted dacoit she became.
It is based upon a true story.
WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS.
8211/96, SLP Civil No.
10519 21/96 CC No.
The heroine was stripped totally naked in the gaze of about a hundred villagers standing in a circle at a distance around a well and she with her front, including her private parts, exposed.
The Tribunal permitted certain words of abuse in the vernacular to be retained because of the companytext in which they were spoken and the persons by whom they were spoken spoken as they are as companyloquially and as part of their daily life, it would be unfair on our part to castigate the use of these words which we would otherwise have done.
These appeals impugn the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in Letters Patent appeals.
The writ petition was filed by the first respondent to quash the certificate of exhibition awarded to the film Bandit Queen and to restrain its exhibition in India.
She was then arrested by the Police and subjected to indignity and humiliation in the Police station.
The Tribunals order states that the film portrays the trials and tribulations and the various humiliations mental and physical heaped on her Phoolan Devi from childhood onwards, which out of desperation and misery drove her to dacoity and the revenge which she takes on her tormentors and those who had humiliated and tortured and had physically abused her.
9363/96 J U D G M E N T BHARUCHA, J. Special leave granted.
On 31st August, 1995, the film was screened, with English sub titles, at the Siri Fort Film Festival of India with the permission of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
Phoolan Devi had to leave the village.
The story thereof as set out above companyes from the judgment under appeal.
Still a child, Phoolan Devi was married off to a man old enough to be her father.
The film is based on a book written by Mala Sen called Indias Bandit Queen.
It added, 4.9.1.
The sequence was in three parts and the appellant had volunteered to reduce the first two sequences to the bare cinematic necessity the Tribunal did number accept this, having ascertained what was meant.
It directed that the second of the three sequences be deleted altogether, and that there be a reduction by 30 of the first sequence and by 20 of the third sequence, with the qualification that the visuals of the mans bare posterior in the first and third sequences be reduced to a flash.
