Gurkaran Singh Dhaliwal vs Central Board Of Film Certification And Another

1

26 (O&M )
FAO No.4033 of 202
IN T
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJ
JAB AND HARYANA
ARH
AT CHANDIGA

163


GURKARAN S
Vs
CENTRAL BOA


CORAM: HON
FAO No.4
Date of D
4033 of 2026 (O&M)
Decision: 07.09.2006
…Appe llant
SINGH DHALIWAL
ARD OF FILM CERTIFICATI
ION AND ANOTHER

…Respondents
N'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKES
SH MANUJA
Present: Mr
Ms
Mr
Mr
Mr
for

Mr
Ms
for

Mr
Mr
for


HARKESH MA
. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate with
h
. Sukriti Rai, Advocate
. Farhad Kohli, Advocate
. Harlove Singh Rajput, Advocat
. Gursher Singh Dhillon, Advoca
te
ate
the appellant.
. Dheeraj Jain, Sr. Advocate with
h
. Shereyansi Verma, Central Gov
vt. Counsel
respondent Nos.1& 2/CBFC.

. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solic
. Harmanjot Singh Gill, Senior P
citor General of India with
Panel Counsel, UOI
respondent No.3.

ANUJA, J.(ORAL)
1. By
way of the present appeal, cha
allenge has been laid to the ord
ders
dated 26.05.202
26 and 14.07.2026, passed by
respondent-Central Board of F
Film
Certification, wh
hereby the application made on
behalf of the appellant for grant
t of
certificate with
h respect to the Punjabi film
m titled “Chardikala” before
the
respondent-Cent
tral Board of Film Certificatio
on in terms of Section 4 of
the
Cinematograph
Act, 1952 (hereinafter referr
red to as “the 1952 Act” ), w
was
declined.
2. Bef
fore adverting to the facts of the
e case, it would be apposite to re
efer
to the relevant p
provisions of the 1952 Act:

MOHMED ATIK
2026.09.08 18:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

2

26 (O&M )
FAO No.4033 of 202
ECTION
S 4
“4. Exami
ination of films. —(1) Any person d
desiring to exhibit any film shall m
make
an applica
ation to the Board for a certificate
e in such form and manner as may
y be
prescribed
d.
(2) The B
Board may, after examining the
e film in such manner as may
be
prescribed
d,—
(i) sanction
n the film for unrestricted public ex
xhibition:
Provided t
that, having regard to any materi
ial in the film, if the Board is of
f the
opinion th
at viewing of such film by any chi
ild between seven to eighteen year
rs of
age is sub
bject to guidance of parents or la
awful guardian, then the Board m
may
sanction th
he film for unrestricted public ex
xhibition with an endorsement to t
that
effect cont
taining UA marker.
Explanatio
on.—For the removal of doubts, it i
is hereby clarified that—
(a) the ex
xpression "seven" denotes comple
etion of seven years of age and
the
expression
n "eighteen" denotes before attainin
ng the age of eighteen years;
(b) an end
dorsement by the Board shall enab
ble the parents and lawful guardian
n of
the child to
o consider whether such child sho
uld view such a film, and shall not
t be
enforced by
by any person other than the parent
ts or lawful guardian of the child;
(ii) sanctio
on the film for public exhibition res
stricted to adults;
(iii) sancti
ion the film for public exhibition re
estricted to members of any profess
sion
or any clas
ss of persons having regard to the n
nature, content and theme of the fil
lm;
(iv) direct
the applicant to carry out such ex
xcisions or modifications in the film
m as
it may dee
em necessary before sanctioning
the film for public exhibition un
nder
clauses (i),
, (ii) and (iii); or
(v) refuse t
to sanction the film for public exhib
bition:
Provided t
that no action under this section sh
hall be taken by the Board, unless
the
applicant h
has been given an opportunity of be
eing heard in the matter.”
S ECTION 7B

“ 7B. Dele
egation of powers by Board. —(1
1) The Central Government may,
by
general o
or special order, direct that an
ny power, authority or jurisdict
tion
exercisabl
e by the Board under this Act shal
ll, in relation to the certification of
f the
films unde
er this Part and subject to such con
ndition, if any, as may be specified
d in
the order,
be exercisable also by the Chairm
an or any other member of the Boa
ard,
and anythi
ing done or action taken by the Ch
hairman or other member specified
d in
the order s
shall be deemed to be a thing done
or action taken by the Board.
MOHMED ATIK
2026.09.08 18:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

3

26 (O&M )
FAO No.4033 of 202
(2) The C
Central Government may, by order
r and subject to such conditions a
and
restriction
s as may be prescribed, autho
orise the regional officer to is
ssue
provisiona
al certificates.”

2.1. The
e plain language of Section 4 o
of the 1952 Act makes it clear t
that
upon an applica
ation being made, it is the Board
d which is to pass the order and t
that
no such action c
can be taken by the Board unle
ess the applicant has been given
n an
opportunity of b
being heard in the matter. Furthe
er, Section 7B of 1952 Act enab
bles
the Central Gov
vernment, by general or specia
al order, to direct that any pow
wer,
authority or juri
sdiction exercisable by the Boar
rd under the Act shall, in relation
n to
the certification
of films under Part II, be exerc
cisable also by the Chairman or a
any
other member o
of the Board and anything so do
one shall be deemed to be a th
hing
done or action ta
aken by the Board. Sub-section (
(2) thereof separately empowers
the
Central Govern
nment to authorise a regional
officer, but only for the limi
ited
purpose of issuin
ng provisional certificates.
3. In
the present case, the impugne
ed orders passed by the Regio
onal
Officer, Central
Board of Film Certification, da
ated 26.05.2026 and 14.07.2026
are
reproduced here
eunder:-
O RDER DATED 26.0
05.2026
“With refe
ference to your application to the
Central Board of Film Certificat
tion
dated 12/0
05/2026 for certification under the
e Cinematograph Act, 1952 to exh
hibit
the film ti
itled "CHARDIKALA" (PUNJAB
BI) , I am directed by the Board
d to
inform you
u that the film has been viewed by
y the Examining Committee and
the
Board has
s come to the conclusion that a
certificate cannot be issued for
r its
exhibition f
for the reasons stated in the Annex
xure.
The above
decision has been taken after
Considerin
ng the submissions made by you
representative before the Commi
ittee
during the
personal hearing, the opportunity
for which was given to you.
In case y
you are aggrieved by the dec
ision of the Board based on
the
recommen
dation of the Examining Committ
tee you may, if you so desire, prefer
r an
MOHMED ATIK
2026.09.08 18:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

4

26 (O&M )
FAO No.4033 of 202
appeal to t
the Revising Committee. The appea
al to the Revising Committee be m
made
within 14
days. If no reply is received from
you within the said period the Bo
oard
will procee
ed to take action as indicated abov
ve.
Yours faithfully,
Arvind Kumar Ja
Regional Officer
ain

Reasons fo
or grant of 'Refusal' of Certificate
to the film are given below:
Highly so
ocial- political sensitive theme,
threaten to law and order
and
glorificatio
on of assassin may lead to breakin
ng of societal-norms. EC finds it n
not-
suitable fo
or public exhibition as per certificat
tion rule.
Arvind Kumar Ja
Regional Officer
ain
”


O RDER DATED 14.0
07.2026
“With refe
ference to your application to the
Central Board of Film Certificat
tion
dated 12/0
05/2026 for certification under the
e Cinematograph Act, 1952 to exh
hibit
the film ti
itled "CHARDIKALA" (PUNJAB
BI) , I am directed by the Board
d to
inform you
u that the film has been viewed
by the Revising Committee and
the
Board has
s come to the conclusion that a
certificate cannot be issued for
r its
exhibition f
for the reasons stated in the Annex
xure.
The above
decision has been taken after
Considerin
ng the submissions made by your
representative before the Commi
ittee
during the
personal hearing, the opportunity
for which was given to you.
In case y
you are aggrieved by the dec
ision of the Board based on
the
recommen
dation of the Revising Committee ,
, you may. If no reply is received fr
from
you within
n the said period the Board will
proceed to take action as indica
ated
above.
Yours faithfully,

Arvind Kumar Ja
Regional Officer
to the film are given below:
ain
Reasons fo
or grant of 'Refusal' of Certificate
Violates th
he article of 2 (xiii), 2(xiv), 2(xv),
, 2(xvii) of guidelines of certificat
tion
made unde
er section 5B(2) of the Cinematogra
aph Act. Hence, refused.
Arvind Kumar Ja
Regional Officer
ain
”

MOHMED ATIK
2026.09.08 18:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

5

26 (O&M )
FAO No.4033 of 202
3.1. Sin
nce the orders were not passed b
by the Board as contemplated un
nder
Section 4 of the
e 1952 Act, this Court vide orde
er dated 25.08.2026 called upon
the
respondents to
disclose whether any order
had been passed by the Cen
ntral
Government de
elegating the power/authority o
or jurisdiction exercisable by
the
Board under Sec
ction 4 of the 1952 Act upon its
Chairman. The relevant part of
the
order dated 25.0
08.2026 passed by this Court is e
extracted hereunder:-
“…
Let an affidavit be filed by respon
dents to the aforesaid extent. Furth
her,
taki
ing into account the controversy in
nvolved in the case in hand, the Un
nion
of I
India through its Secretary, Minis
try of Information and Broadcasti
ing,
Gov
vernment of India, having office at
t 3rd Floor, Kartavya Bhawan 2, N
New
Del
lhi-110 001 is ordered to be imp
pleaded as respondent No.3 and
d an
affi
davit be filed explaining about
any power been exercised by
the
Gov
vernment of India in terms of Sectio
on 7-B of the 1952 Act….”

4. Pur
rsuant thereto, the following ord
der dated 29.08.2026 passed by
the
Government of
India, Ministry of Information
n and Broadcasting, was placed
on
record before th
is Court, which is reproduced he
ereunder:-
“No.M-11020/2/20
026-DO(FC)
GOVERNMENT
OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF INFORMATION
N AND BROADCASTING
Kartavya Bhavan 2, Ne
ew Delhi-110001
Dated: 29.08.2
026
ORDER
R
In exercise
e of the powers conferred by Sectio
on 7B of the Cinematograph Act, 1
952
(37 of 195
52) (hereinafter referred to as "the
e said Act"), the Central Governm
ment
hereby dir
rects that any power, authority or j
jurisdiction exercisable by the Bo
oard
of Film C
Certification (hereinafter referred t
to as "the Board") in relation to
the
certificatio
on of films under Part II of the s
said Act, including the powers un
nder
Section 4,
sub-sections (3) and (4) of Sec
ction 5, Section 5A, Section 5B
and
Section 7C
C thereof, shall also be exercisable
by the Chairperson, Central Board
d of
Film Cert
tification, in respect of applicatio
ons for certification received at
all
MOHMED ATIK
2026.09.08 18:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

6

26 (O&M )
FAO No.4033 of 202
Regional O
Offices of the Board, with immed
diate effect and until further ord
ders,
subject to
extant rules and guidelines.
[s
29/08
(Santosh Kumar Maur
Under Secretary to the Govt. of Ind
d/-]
8/26
rya)
dia ”
U

4.1. A p
perusal thereof clearly shows th
hat it is only w.e.f. 29.08.2026 t
that
the Central Gov
vernment, in exercise of its pow
wers under Section 7B of the 19
952
Act, has directe
ed that the powers, authority a
and jurisdiction exercisable by
the
Board in relatio
n to certification of films under
r Part II, including the power un
nder
Section 4, shal
ll be exercisable by the Cha
airperson, Central Board of F
Film
Certification. Co
onsequently, before 29.08.2026
there was no order of delegation
n in
favour of the Ch
hairperson, Central Board of Film
m Certification, much less in fav
vour
of the Regional
l Officer to exercise power un
nder Section 4 of the 1952 A
Act.
However, yet th
he orders dated 26.05.2026 an
nd 14.07.2026 were passed by
the
Regional Office
er, Central Board of Film Certific
cation. It is thus evident that on
the
dates on which
the impugned orders came to
be passed, neither had the Cen
ntral
Government issu
ued any direction under Section
7B(1) of the 1952 Act enabling
the
exercise of the
Board's powers by any other
authority, nor does Section 7B
B(2)
thereof avail the
e respondents, inasmuch as the
said provision permits the Cen
ntral
Government to
authorise a regional officer fo
for the limited purpose of issu
uing
provisional cert
tificates alone and not for refu
sing to sanction a film for pub
blic
exhibition under
r Section 4(2)(v) of the 1952 Ac
ct. The impugned orders, therefo
ore,
came to be passe
ed by an authority lacking the co
ompetence to do so.
5. Tod
day, it has come to the notice
of this Court that in view of
the
absence of any
order of delegation under Sect
tion 7B of the 1952 Act as on
the
dates on which
the impugned orders came to be
e passed, the said orders have b
een
MOHMED ATIK
2026.09.08 18:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

7

26 (O&M )
FAO No.4033 of 202
withdrawn by
the Regional Officer, Central
Board of Film Certification,
on
06.09.2026. It h
has been further decided that the
e matter shall be considered afr
resh
by the compete
nt authority after affording the
appellant adequate opportunity
y of
hearing. The sai
d order dated 06.09.2026 is repr
oduced hereunder:-
ORDER
In
compliance with the directions
s of the competent authority,
the
Exa
amining Committee (EC) Order
dated 26.05.2026 and the Revis
sing
Com
mmittee (RC) Order dated 14.07.2
2026, issued in respect of the Punj
jabi
film
m “Chardikala”, are hereby withdra
awn.
The
e matter shall be considered afre
esh by the competent authority af
after
affo
ording the applicant a reasonable o
opportunity of being heard.
This
s issues with the approval of the co
ompetent authority.”


Sd/-
Regional Officer”

6. A
perusal of the scheme of
the 1952 Act, as also of
the
Cinematograph
(Certification) Rules, 2024, (
(hereinafter referred to as ‘20
024
Rules’) would
show that neither the Examin
ning Committee nor the Revis
sing
Committee is an
n authority competent to pass a
final order upon an application
for
certification. Th
he said Committees being recom
mmendatory bodies, their function
n is
to examine a film
m and record their opinion there
eon. The decision upon that opin
nion
is to be taken by
y the Board or by the authority u
upon whom the powers of the Bo
oard
stand validly de
elegated. The impugned orders
dated 26.05.2026 and 14.07.20
026
proceed on the r
recommendations of these Comm
mittees and stand issued and sign
ned
by the Regional
l Officer, without disclosing any
y decision having been taken by
the
Board or by
any competent delegate there
eof. Therefore, the orders da
ated
26.05.2026 and
14.07.2026 were passed in clea
ar contravention of Section 4 of
the
1952 Act.
MOHMED ATIK
2026.09.08 18:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

8

26 (O&M )
FAO No.4033 of 202
7. It is
s unfortunate that this position h
has come to light only after repea
ated
queries were rai
ised by this Court and upon the
e respondents being called upon
n by
order dated 25.0
08.2026 to place on record the re
equisite order of delegation. Had
the
appellant not be
en driven to this Court, an order
r suffering from a fundamental w
want
of jurisdiction
would have continued to ope
erate against him. The delay
so
occasioned is als
so at variance with the scheme o
of the 1952 Act and the 2024 Ru
ules,
which prescribe
strict timelines at each stage of
certification. The appellant, hav
ving
applied on 12.0
5.2026 under the priority schem
me upon payment of enhanced f
fee,
has been left wi
thout a decision by a competent
t authority for close to four mont
ths,
with the comme
ercial prejudice that such delay
in the release of a film inevita
ably
causes. Such del
lay is to be deprecated.
8. Be
that as it may, vide order
dated 29.08.2026 passed by
the
Government of
India, Ministry of Information
n and Broadcasting in exercise
e of
powers under S
ection 7B of the 1952 Act, the
powers, authority and jurisdict
tion
exercisable by t
the Board in relation to certific
cation of films under Part II of
the
said Act, inclu
uding the power under Section
n 4, now stand delegated to
the
Chairperson, Ce
entral Board of Film Certificat
tion. The Chairperson is theref
fore
now the compet
ent authority to decide the appel
llant's application.
9. Acc
cordingly, it is made clear that
before passing of any order on
the
application subm
mitted by the appellant, opportu
unity of hearing be afforded by
the
competent autho
ority in terms of the proviso to
Section 4(2) of the 1952 Act, r
ead
with the order d
dated 29.08.2026 passed under
Section 7B of the said Act by
the
Government of
India, Ministry of Information a
and Broadcasting. Before afford
ding
opportunity of h
hearing to the appellant, the rep
port and the relevant records bef
fore
the Examining C
Committee or Revising Committ
tee (as the case may be) be suppl
lied
MOHMED ATIK
2026.09.08 18:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document

9

26 (O&M )
FAO No.4033 of 202
to the appellant,
, save for the names of the mem
mbers of the Committee, disclos
sure
whereof stands
protected under sub-rule (6) of
Rule 23 of the 2024 Rules, so t
that
he may represen
nt before the authorities in an app
propriate manner.
10. The
e learned Additional Solicitor G
eneral of India appearing on beh
half
of respondent N
No.3-Union of India, also ass
sures that the constitution of
the
Examining Com
mmittee for the purpose of exami
ining the Punjabi film “Chardika
ala”
shall be done lat
test by 10.09.2026 and the rest o
of the process/consideration towa
ards
certification of f
film shall be carried out in terms
s of Rule 37 read with Rule 33(2)
) of
the 2024 Rules.
11. Acc
cordingly, in view of the withdr
rawal of the impugned orders da
ated
26.05.2026 and
14.07.2026, the appeal is dispos
sed of in the above terms.
12. Pen
nding misc. application(s), if any
y, shall also stand disposed of.

(HARKESH MANUJA)
JUDGE

September 07, 2
Atik

2026

ether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
ether reportable Yes/No
Whe
Whe
MOHMED ATIK
2026.09.08 18:02
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document