Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. (This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)īusiness Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. The PIL had claimed that the film's producer, Magical Dreams Production Pvt Ltd, has used a look-alike of the unnamed political figure who has been "painted in a bad light". The plea had claimed that the movie contains various scenes "aimed and targeted against a political figure of the country. Katara had not named the political figure in his plea. The petition had also stated that a 55 second video clipping of the film had been released online and it showed an actor, having close resemblance to an existing political figure, inciting violence. The PIL by Ajay Katara had opposed release of the film claiming that it is against the ideology of the "oldest political party of the country". It has also said that "at any rate, since the movies has been certified by CBFC/statutory authority in accordance with the guidelines made under the Cinematograph Act 1952, for certification of films for public exhibition, no interference is warranted by this court on the basis of the vague and unsubstantiated allegations in the writ petition". "So far as the posters of the movie placed on record are concerned, we are of the view that the same is not sufficient to arrive at a conclusion that the contents of the film are objectionable as sought to be contended by the petitioner," the court has said in its order.
"It is relevant to note that the entire writ petition is based on video trailer stated to have been made available on YouTube. The court also said that since the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has certified the movie, starring Soha Ali Khan and Vir Das in the lead, for public exhibition, "no interference is warranted". The bench was of the view that video trailer and posters of the film were "not sufficient to arrive at a conclusion that the contents of the film are objectionable as sought to be contended" in the plea. Indira Gandhi was assassinated on October 31, 1984.
0 kommentar(er)
