IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION N0. OF 2016 In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra?vires, wrongful and arbitrary the part of the Central inaction on Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application ?Udta for certi?cation of its ?lm Punjab?. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. VERSUS Lacie; Sr. No. Particulars Page Nos. 1. Proforma I 113* 2. Synopsis A 3. Writ Petition 4. Vakalatnama I g/g 3 5. Memorandum of Registered Address 3 2. 6. List of Documents 33 7. Exhibit - Ag: Articles wherein the release date of the 3573?- Subject Film is announced. 8. Exhibit - Copy of the Application for Certification 3 8 dated 10th May, 2016 9. Exhibit - 99? [4 Copy of Respondent No. 1?s letter dated 24th 5- May 2016 referring the 'Subject Film to the ri Or? Revising Committee. 10. Exhibit - A copy of the Declaration requested by Respondent No. 1 11. Exhibit - A copy of the FCAT Appeal dated 24th May 2016 12. Exhibit - A copy of the letter dated 25th May 2016 calling upon the secretary of FCAT to look into the appeal being FCAT Application No.19 and expedite the process of certi?cation. 13. Exhibit - A copy of the letter from the Petitioners? Advocates, withdrawing the appeal before the FCAT, with liberty to move it before the Revising Committee. 14. Exhibit - A copy of the Petitioner?s letter dated 7th June 2016 calling upon Respondent No. 1 to issue the requisite and/ or convey its decision qua certi?cation of the subject Film to the Petitioner, within 24 hours from the receipt of the letter MUMBAI 8- .- THANE DIST. 15. Exhibit - ?11 to 13? Copy of Articles and media reports stating that Respondent No.1 has recommended severe cuts to the subject Film 16. Exhibit A copy of the Synopsis of the subject Film 17. Exhibit to Copies of Articles dealing with the problem of drug addiction faced in the State of Punjab 18. Exhibit - to Copies of Articles showing political establishments in the State of Punjab and expressed their objections and opposition to a. g. I 7? - the release and public exhibition of the subject Film. 19. Af?davit in Support of Writ Petition "35 aik Naik Co., r? Partner Advocates for the Petitioners s; BHAISARE MUMBM 3? ?it DIST {k I. No: 2.330 ox pr. 0% ?3 or' IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. A awr- VERSUS 1. 81-0 A .Pn/ OF 2016 In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its ?lm ?Udta Punjab?. PRO FORMA Of?ce Notes, Of?ce Memoranda of Coram, Appearance, Court?s Order of direction and Prothonotary?s order Court of Judge?s Oders -- - (I Of?ce Notes, Of?ce Memoranda of Coram, Court of Judge?s Oders Appearance, Court?s Order of direction and Prothonotary?s order N- BHAISAEE MUMBAI a. THANE msr. Of?ce Notes, Of?ce Memoranda of Coram, Court of Judge?s Oders Appearance, Court?s Order of direction and _Prothonotary?s order 5: -. I. N- ?3 . MUMBN THANE 0:37. ?13) {k a. No: 2330 . 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its ?lm ?Udta Punjab?. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. b-Aw' VERSUS 6.13456 AN :2 SYNOPSIS Sr. No Date Particulars 1. Petitioner No. is a Company engaged, inter alia, in the business of producing cinematograph ?lms. Petitioner No.1 enjoys a reputation in the market in relation to its business, as, it has in the past produced well know ?lms such as ?Lootera?, ?Hasee toh phasee?, ?Queen?, ?Hunterr?, ?Masaan?, ?Bombay Velvett?, ?Shandhar?, amongst others. Petitioner No. 1 is also the producer of the ?lm ?Udta Punjab? (hereinafter ?the Subject Film?) Petitioner No. 2 is a citizen of India and is entitled to constitutional and fundamental rights, inter alia, under Article 19 of Constitution of India, 1950 (?Constitution?) and also the director of the Film. 3. Respondent No. 1 is the Central Board of Film Certi?cation, which is a statutory body constituted under the Cinematograph Act and are statutorily empowered to examine and certify cinematograph ?lms prior to their exhibition. 4. Respondent No. 2 is the Central Government Ministry which exercises executive control over Respondent No. f? On or about almost 2 months back, Petitioner No.1 announced the scheduled date of release of the subject Film. 10Lh May 2016 Petitioner No. 1 had applied to Respondent No. 1 and had sought an (Adult) certi?cation. 13th May, 2016 Respondent No. I examined the ?lm. 24?h May, 2016 Respondent No. 1, after examining the Film on 18??1 May, 2016, conveyed to the Petitioner that it?s Chairperson had referred the Film to Respondent No. 1?s Revision Committee. 24??1 May, 2016 The Petitioner had preferred an appeal with the Film Certi?cation Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as against the decision/ order contained in the letter dated 24th May 2016 by which Respondent No. 1 had referred the subject Film to its Revising Committee. 10. 25??1 May 2016 Copy of the letter dated 25?h May 2016 wherein the Petitioner calls upon the secretary of FCAT to look into the appeal being FCAT Applicatioit No.19 and expedite the process of certi?cation so that the Petitioner would be able to meet its deadlines. . . BHMSAR The Petitioner continued to pursue the Revising Committee to examine the Film and give its recommendations in the matter to the Chairman of Respondent No. 1. This process was simultaneous with the appeal which the Petitioner had - preferred before the FCAT. However, the Petitioner decided that it was not in its interest to pursue the appeal before the FCAT. 30m ay 2016 12. The Petitioners? Advocates, withdrew the appeal before the FCAT, with a liberty to move before the Revising Committee. 13. 3rd June 2016 Revision Committee examined the Film 14. Under the Rules, within 3 days of examination, the presiding of?cer of the Revision Committee is to convey the recommendations of the Revising Committee to the Chairman of Respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 1 post receipt of such recommendation is expected to convey its decision in the matter to the Petitioner in a timely manner bearing in mind the proposed release date of the Film. 15. 7th June 2016 Letter from Petitioner to Respondent No. 1 recording the aforesaid events and has, whilst speci?cally citing the urgency of the situation, called upon Respondent No. 1 to issue the requisite and/or convey its decision qua certi?cation of the Film to the Petitioner, within 24 hours from the receipt of the letter. 16. No reply from Respondent No. 1 17. Despite the Petitioner awaiting the Respondents decision, there have been a several media reports stating that Respondent No.1 has recommended severe cuts to the subject Film. 18. 17?h June 2016 Date of release of the Film. 19. The Revising Committee has examined the Film on 3rd June, 2016. Thereafter, more than 3 days have passed. Even after the Petitioner?s letter dated 7Lh June, 2016 no response has been received. Hence this Petition. POINTS TO BE URGED: As stated in the grounds of the present Writ Petition ACTS RULES TO BE REFERRED TO: a) Constitution of India b) The Cinematograph Act, 1952 c) Any other statute or rules as and when referred and relied Naik Naik Co a Partner Advocates for the Petitioners Mumbai Dated this day of June, 2016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 \gi? In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of tha Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in Mum? '3 processing the THANE DIST. Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its ?lm ?Udta Punjab?. 1. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its of?ce at) Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 053 2. Mr. Vikas Bahl an adult Indian Inhabitant, having his of?ce address at Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai - 400 053. .. Petitioners Versus 1. The Central Board of ?lm Certi?cation through its Regional Of?ce at 91-E, Bharat Bhavan, Walkeshwar Road, Mumbai 400 006 2. Union of India, through the Ministry of Information and Broad Casting, New Delhi 7.. Repondents 5? N. s; sausme (1 MUMBAI THANE DIST. 1) H. No: TO at? THE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND OTHER PUISNE JUDGES 0F c? .2 THE HIGH COURT obi-75% 9/ HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONER ABOVE- NAMED: MOST RESPECT FULLY SHEWETH: 1. Parties: 1.1 Petitioner No. 1 is a company engaged, inter alia, in the business of production of cinematograph films. Petitioner No.1 has to its credit, the production and release of critically acclaimed and/or commercially successful ?lms such as ?Lootera?, ?Hasee Toh Phasee?, ?Queen?, ?Hunterr?, ?Masaan?, ?Bombay Velvett?, ?Shandhar?, amongst others. Petitioner No.1 is also the producer of the ?lm ?Udta Punjab? (hereinafter ?the subject Film?), which is a work of ?ction; and which depicts the problems faced by the 3 people of the State of Punjab, of widespread prevalence of drug addiction. The subject Film thus, deals with a socially and morally relevant subject. On 10th May 2016, Petitioner No.1.has applied to Respondent No.1 for certi?cation for exhibition of the subject Film under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (?Cinematograph Act?). Petitioner No. 1 is therefore an applicant for certi?cation of exhibition of the subject ?lm I before Respondent No. 1. 1.2 Petitioner No. 2 is a citizen of India and is entitled to the constitutional and fundamental rights, guaranteed under the Constitution of India, 1950 (?Constitution?). Petitioner No.2 is a shareholder and director on the Board of Petitioner No.1 and is vitally interested in the challenge contained in the present Petition. In this Petition, for the sake of convenience, Petitioner No. 1 is hereinafter referred to as the ?Petitioner? and Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are hereinafter collectively referred to as the ?Petitioners?. 1.3 Respondent No. 1 is the Central Board of Film Certi?cation, which is a statutory body constituted and exercises power and functions under the Cinematograph Act. Respondent No. 1 is statutorily empowered to examine and certify Cinematograph ?lms prior to their public exhibition. Respondent No. 1?s powers, authority and duties are set out in the Cinematograph Act; the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983 (?Rules?); and Guidelines fOr Certi?cation of Films for public Exhibition issued by the Central Government (?Guidelines?). Respondent No. 1 is therefore, a state authority mandated to act as per and within the con?nes of the Cinematograph Act and Rules. s. BHAISABE Mums? ?t THANE DIST. R. No: 2330 )1 Respondent No. 1, being a state authority is also mandated constitutionally and statutorily obliged to act in a fair; reasonable and non-arbitrary manner and cannot in performing its statutory duties infringe and/or violate constitutional and fundamental rights of persons, '31- . Moreen s. BHAISABE 't 1.4 1.5 2.1 1; individuals and citizens of India. Respondent No. 1 is duty bound to perform its statutory functions under the Cinematograph Act in a manner that would give effect to the statute and further the constitutional and fundamental rights of persons and citizens of India. Respondent No. 2 is the Central Government Ministry which exercises executive control over Respondent No. 1. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are ?State? under Article 12 of the Constitution and accordingly are amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Hon?ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Purpose of the present Petition: The release of the subject Film ?Udta Punjab? is scheduled to take place 17?? June 2016. Prior to its release and exhibition, the subject Film requires certi?cation from Respondent No. 1. For this, on 10th May 2016, Petitioner 0. 1 had applied to Respondent No. 1 and had sought an (Adult) certi?cation. Respondent No. 1, after examining the Film on 18Lh May, 2016, conveyed to the Petitioner on 24th May, 2016 that it?s Chairperson had referred the subject Film to Respondent No. 1?s Revising Committee. No reason and/or report making available the reasons for such a reference was made available. Thereafter, the Revising Committee has examined the subject Film on 3rd June 2016 and it is statutorily obliged to make its report to the Chairman within 3 days. Respondent No. 1 has till date not conveyed its decision in the matter to the Petitioner. This is despite the fact that Respondent No. 1 is aware that the subject Film?s release is scheduled to take place on 17th June 2016. In the circumstances, there is on the part of Respondent No. 1, unexplainable and arbitrary inaction and causes? 3? 1:13.qu s. I i 2.2 3.1 non?exercise of its power and authority under the Cinematograph Act and Rules. The inaction of Respondent No. 1 th-?eatens to postpone/ delay the scheduled release of the subject Film to a date beyond 17th June, 2016. This will severely and adversely impact the Petitioners? rights in relation to exhibition of the subject Film as well as its constitutional and fundamental rights under the Constitution. The Petitioner is therefore, constrained to institute the present Writ Petition and seek appropriate reliefs from this Hon?ble Court directing Respondent No. 1 to perform its statutory duties; issue the certi?cation; and/or convey its decision in relation to the subject Film, to the Petitioner. Hence, the present Petition. A concise statement of facts leading upto and /or necessitating the ?ling of the present Petition are as follows: The Petitioner has produced the subject Film ?Udta Punjab? incurring of (Rupees Twenty Four Crores Fifty Lakhs Only). The subject Film is a work of ?ction; seeks to depict the prevailing alarming drug addiction problem faced by the State of Punjab, India; and the subject Film is therefore a socially relevant ?lm. On or about almost 2 months back, an expenditure approximately Petitioner No.1 announced the scheduled date of release of the subject Film. This is evident from the articles annexed at to hereto. The Petitioner has scheduled the release of the subject Film on 17th June 2016. For this, various contracts and arrangements have been executed by the Petitioner with third parties such as cinema owner, advertising and marketing firms, agents, etc. Additionally, towards the stated release, the Petitioner has till date inter alici, expended a sum of (Rupees Five Crores Only) on promotional and advertising expenses. Towards the stated release, the Petitioner has also MUMBM a THANE DIST- 3.2 3-3 6 booked 1000 theatres and 1800 screens across India for the purpose of exhibition the subject Film. As such, towards release of the subject Film as planned on 17th June 2016, the Petitioner has expended approximately (Rupees TWenty Nine Crores Fifty Lakhs Only). On 10th May 2016, for the purpose of exhibition of the subject Film, the Petitioner ?led with Respondent No. 1, an application for certi?cation of the subject Film. The Application was ?led in the format prescribed by the Cinematograph Act and the Rules. The Petitioner sought for the subject Film certi?cation. The Petitioner had also informed the Respondent No. 1 that the subject Film?s release was scheduled to be on 17th June 2016. As such, Respondent No.1 was well aware of the scheduled date of release of the subject Film and that the Petitioner?s application was required to be processed expeditiously. This is also the mandate of the Cinematograph Act. A copy of the Application dated 10th May, 2016 is annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit The subject Film was examined by the Examining Committee of Respondent No. 1 on 18th May 2016. However, vide a communication dated 24th May 2016, the Chairperson of Respondent No. 1, without assigning any reasons; in purported exercise of powers under Rule 24(1) of the Rules; and without any report of the Examining Committee being made available to the Petitioner, referred the subject Film to the Revising Committee of Respondent No. 1. By the letter, Respondent No. I requested the Petitioner to furnish: 15 copies of synopsis and songs of the subject Film; demand draft prescribed as per the Rules; and a declaration that the print of the subject Film presented to the Examining Committee for examination is the same that was shown to the Examining Committee and that no alteration of any kind has been affected in the print. The 7 Petitioner complied with Respondent No.1?s requisitions by 1st June 2016. A copy of Respondent No. 1?s letter dated 24th May 2016 is annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit A copy of the Declaration requested by Respondent No. 1 which was made on 24th May 2016 is annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit 3.4 In the meantime, on 24th May 2016, the Petitioner had also preferred an appeal with the Film Certi?cation Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as against the decision/ order contained in the letter dated 24th May 2016 by which Respondent No. 1 had referred the subject Film to its Revising Committee. By a letter dated 25th May 2016, the Petitioner called upon the secretary of FCAT to look into the appeal being CAT Application No.19 and expedite the process of certi?cation so that the Petitioner would be able to meet its deadlines. A copy of the FCAT Appeal dated 24th May 2016 is annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit A copy of the letter dated 25th May 2016 is annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit The Petitioner thereafter, was advised that its FCAT appeal is not maintainable. Accordingly, by a letter dated 30?h May 2016, the ,7 Petitioners? Advocates, withdrew the appeal before the FCAT, with liberty to move it before the Revising Committee. A copy of the Petitioners? Advocate letter dated 30th May 2016 is annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit - The Petitioner continued to pursue with Respondent No.1 to '5 1; gexamine the subject Film and give its recommendations in H. 9. BHAESERE . ?r 5:31,,63 33?: matter to the Chairman of Respondent No. 1. THAME DIST R. Ho: Revising Committee examined the subject Film on 3rd June 2016. However, till date, Respondent No. 1 has not conveyed its decision in relation to certi?cation of the subject Film to the Petitioner. This is despite the fact that 3-7 3.8 3-9 PS under the Rules, within 3 days of examination, the presiding of?cer of the Revision Committee is to convey the recommendations of the Revising Committee to the Chairman of Respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 1 post receipt of such recommendation is expected to convey its decision in the matter to the Petitioner in a timely manner bearing in mind the proposed release date of the subject Film. In the circumstances, by a letter dated 7th June 2016, the Petitioner has recorded the aforesaid events and has, whilst speci?cally citing the urgency of the situation, called upon Respondent No. 1 to issue the requisite and/ or convey its decision qua certification of the subject Film to the Petitioner, within 24 hours from the receipt of the letter. A copy of the Petitioner?s letter dated 7th June 2016 is annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit However, till date there has been no response. Despite the Petitioner awaiting the Respondents decision, there have been a spate of media reports stating that Respondent No.1 has recommended severe cuts to the subject Film. Copies of such media reports are annexed at EXHIBITS to hereto. It is apparent that the source of such reports can only be Respondent No.1. In the circumstances, Respondent No. 1?s inaction and silence is clearly the outcome of an arbitrary and wrongful non-exercise of the power and authority conferred upon it under the Cinematograph Act. This non-exercise of power and authority threatens to prejudice Petitioners? release of the subject Film as per its scheduled date of release. This is despite the fact that the subject Film deserves certi?cation and exhibition. If the subject Film does not release on 17th June 2016, the Petitioner will face grave and irreparable loss and prejudice. This will not be limited to monetary losses 9 but will also lead to a massive reputational loss for the Petitioner in the ?lm industry and trade. Moreover, the same will be a patent infringement of the constitutional and fundamental rights of the Petitioners guaranteed by the Constitution. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid actions/ inactions of Respondent No. 1 which are nothing but an arbitrary and wrongful non-exercise of the power and authority conferred upon it by the Cinematograph Act, the Petitioner is constrained to institute the present Petition on the following grounds, each of which are in the alternative and without prejudice to one another. GROUNDS The non-processing andZor delay in processing of the Application dated 10th May, 2016 owing to the inaction pm the part of Respondent No. 1 is ultra?vires the Cinematograph Act and the Rules; is wrongful; arbitrag; and unreasonable. The same therefore, violates Article 1_4 of the Constitution. Respondent No. 1 is liable to be made to perform its statutog obligations in a timely manner and must grant in favour of the Petitioner. a certi?cate permitting it to exhibit the subject Film: The Petitioner respectfully submits that under the scheme of Cinematograph Act, it would be lawful for the Petitioner to exhibit the subject Film only after it applies for and receives certi?cation from Respondent No. 1, in relation thereto. In the present case, the Petitioner has, in order to comply with its legal obligations, applied for certi?cation on 10th May 2016 Le. well before the scheduled date of release of the subject Film. h. Z.. s. IHAISABE . NUMBAI 1 I THANE DIST. a. Na: 2330 i (ii) (iv) \0 The Cinematograph Act and the Rules prescribe a procedure which requires reasonably expeditious certi?cation of cinematograph ?lms. This is apparent from a reading of Rules 21, 22, 23 and 24 of the Rules which provide that post examination of a cinematograph ?lm, the members of the examining committee and/ or the revising committee as the case may be, cannot leave the examination theatre without ?lling the requisite forms and thereby giving their decisions/ recommendations in relation to the certi?cation of the ?lm. Therefore, the decision in relation to the certi?cation which a ?lm is to receive is really contemplated to be taken on the very day that the ?lms are examined. As per the said Rules, the decision of the examining committee and/or revision committee as the case may be, is to be conveyed to the Chairman of Respondent No. 1 within 3 days of the examination. It is therefore, obvious that the Cinematograph Act and Rules have contemplated and/ or factored in the need for expeditious certi?cation of ?lms to facilitate timely commercial exploitation of the ?lms. In fact, a reading of the proviso to Rule 21(2) of the Rules, plainly indicates that the Chairman of Respondent No. 1 may even direct or permit an application in respect of a ?lm to be delivered to a Regional Of?cer other than the Regional Of?cer to whom such applications would have been delivered, where the chairman is satis?ed that ?immediate action for examination of the ?lm is necessary? and/or where the chairman specifies such other reasons in writing. .. a? .. B) (vi) I It is therefore apparent that the Rules have empowered Respondent No. 1 to take necessary steps to ensure expeditious certi?cation of cinematograph ?lms. Even otherwise, the fact that cinematograph ?lms have limited shelf-life and are required to be released in a timely manner, this would require a timely certi?cation and/ or decision would be when Respondent No .1 has been intimated of the proposed release date of a cinematograph film. In the present case, the Petitioner has while making its application dated 10th May, 2016, has already informed to the Respondent No. 1, the fact that the scheduled release date of the subject Film is 17th June 2016. Even otherwise, by scheduled date of release of the subject Film was in the public domain. Therefore, bearing in mind the statutory mandate, it is incumbent that Respondent No.1 conveys its decision in the matter to the Petitioner so that the subject Film can be released and/or enable the Petitioner to take appropriate steps. The Petitioners submit that the Respondents? inaction andZor willful failure, neglect andZor default in issuing certi?cation of public exhibition for and in respect of the ub'ect Film is not onl ille a1 and unconstitutional but the same is also af?icted by the vices of legal malice, colourable exercise of powers and manifest arbitrariness. This renders the same foul of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. This is for the following reasons: as is apparent from the short synopsis of the subject Film (Exhibit hereto), the subject Film deals with the problem of drug addiction faced in the State of Punjab. This in fact, has a social signi?cance af?icting the public of Punjab and as such, the subject a a. Ne: 2330 N. a. earns-sane (f Mums-a: a THANE '3 ii) 3 a? 0/ Film deals with a socially relevant issue. This issue has been raised in a large body in articles of newspaper reports, copies of which are annexed at EHIBITS to hereto; as such, qua the substance of the subject Film, the Respondents can have no issue. The Petitioners are well within their legal and constitutional rights to make a cinematograph ?lm concerning the problem of drug addiction in the State of Punjab. In fact, similar cinematograph ?lms dealing with the State?s speci?c problems of drug addiction, including, the cinematograph ?lms entitled alwa? and ?Dum Maro Dum? have been made and publicly exhibited; as regards the depiction of the subject Film, the Petitioners themselves have sought certi?cation for the subject Film. As such, the Petitioners? subject Film will only have adult viewers and therefore, the scope of the Respondent No. 1 wanting to make cuts in the subject Film is extremely limited and narrow. There can be no warrant, justi?cation and/or occasion for the Respondents to have any objection on either the contents and/ or depiction of the subject Film to adult audience. As such, the Petitioners assert a legal right and entitlement to certi?cation for public exhibition of the subject Film in the full manner in which the same has been furnished to Respondent No.1; Respondent No.1 has failed and neglected to exercise its statutory functions; appreciating the aforesaid, and issue the requisite certi?cation for public exhibition to the subject Film; and facilitate the timely release of the subject Film in accordance with its obligations under the Act. Much to the contrary, . aisrka?gshw .2. .mmh l3 Respondent No.1?s impugned actions, failure and/ or neglect qua the subject Film is per?se demonstrative of manifest arbitrariness; legal malice; and/or approach of hostile discrimination qua the Petitioners. Considering that the subject Film is pending certi?cation since 10th May 2016 i.e. for a period of 4 weeks, Respondent No.1 can have no justi?cation to explain such inordinate and undue delay; v) the Petitioners respectfully submit that the willful failure and/ or neglect and] or inordinate timely delay on the part of the Respondent No. 1 in issuance of the certi?cation for public exhibition of the subject Film is purposive and mala?de. This is because, after the promos of the subject Film have entered in the public domain, a large body of the political establishments in the State of Punjab have expressed their objections and opposition to the release and public exhibition of the subject Film. This is evident from the newspaper report and/ or articles annexed at EXHIBITS to hereto; vi) Respondent No.1 comes under the Union of India, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The appointments in Respondent No.1 are also made by the political establishments. Considering this, Respondent No.1?s approach in the matter can never be free from being in?uential by the opinions of the political class and/or establishments. In the instant case, clearly, this has occurred. It is in the Petitioners? submission that is only buckling to political opinion and/or pressure and having full disregard to its statutory and constitutional obligations, Respondent rams DIST 3- N3: 2330 No.1 is withholding the. issuance of certi?cation and/or decision qua exhibition of the subject Film; and vii) the legal malice and/or manifest arbitrariness with which Respondent No.1 acts qua the Petitioners is evident not only by its failure and neglect in the matter but also by its acts. Till date, the Petitioner No. 1 who is the applicant before Respondent No.1 has not heard from Respondent No.1 of its decision to- permit public exhibition of the subject Film. As against this, newspaper reports indicate that Respondent No.1 has proposed to make severe cuts in the subject Film. The source of such newspaper reports can only be Respondent No.1. Assuch, whilst Respondent No.1 keeps the most affected party (the Petitioners herein) in the dark and awaiting its decision, on the other hand, Respondent No.1 and/ or its of?ce bearers have no qualms about releasing its so-called ?con?dential and/ or sensitive information? to the media. The aforesaid inaction and/or actions on the part of Respondent No.1 are demonstrative of its legal malice; manifest arbitrariness; and hostile and discriminatory approach qua the Petitioners. Respondent No.1 has therefore, violated its constitutional obligations to act fairly and reasonably and as such, is in breach of Article 14 of the Constitution. C) The Petitioner asserts that it ought to be granted "an certi?cation without any excisions/ modi?cations to the subject Film. However, and without prejudicePetltloner respectfully submits that regardless of the Mir?mm e: 7:43.525 msr. ?73) dec1310n of Respondent No. 1 1n the matter, it 18 essential that Respondent No. 1 takes such decision immediately and/ or forthwith conveys the same to the Petitioner. This is for the following reasons: . ,m WHEN m-msme THANE DIST. 2330 J) i) ii) Br? Under the Cinematograph Act, Respondent No. 1 can either grant certi?cation as requested or may grant certi?cation subject to certain modi?cations/ excisions being made to the subject Film. Once the subject Film is certi?ed and permitted to make be exhibited as is requested, the Petitioner will have to make necessary arrangements. This also involves the Petitioner taking actions and steps vis-a-vis third parties/ cinema owners for which the Petitioner will require at least 10 days. Considering that the scheduled date of release is only 10 days away, the Petitioner needs a forthwith and/ or immediate decision in the matter from Respondent No.1; On the other hand, if Respondent No. 1 recommends certain modi?cations/ excisions to the subject Film, the Petitioner would require reasonable time prior to the release date i.e. 17th June 2016 to appeal against such a decision and/or to comply with the same. Both these processes are still required to be completed on or before 17th June 2016. The situation would be the same if Respondent No.1 decides not to issue a certi?cate to the subject Film. In such an eventuality, the Petitioner would require adequate time to proceed and ?le an appropriate Appeal against the decision. On all accounts therefore, the Petitioner respectfully submits that the Cinematograph Act and the Rules mandate that Respondent No. 1 takes its decision on the Petitioners? Application dated 10th May 2016 and conveys such decision to the Petitioner and/ or on an urgent basis. In the present case, the Petitioner has ?led its Application with Respondent No.1 on 10th May 2016. The Petitioner respectfully submits that it (rm. s. BHAISARE mums? Tame DIST a. m; 2330 . I) iv) LC has approached Respondent No.1 well in advance for Respondent No.1 to issue certi?cation/ take a decision in relation to the subject Film within a reasonable timeframe. Therefore, the Petitioner respectfully submits that Respondent No.1?s conduct in not issuing certi?cation/ delaying the issue of certi?cation, in relation to the subject Film, plainly violates the Cinematograph Act and the Rules and frustrates the objective which the Cinematograph Act seeks to achieve. This by itself renders Respondent No.1?s inactions to be ultra vires the Cinematograph Act. By not taking a decision in the matter, it is plainly apparent that Respondent No.1 is wrongfully not exercising its power and authority and is thereby abdicating its role and function under the Ciniematograph Act and the Rules. It is therefore, incumbent that Respondent No. 1 issue the requisite certi?cate in the Petitioner?s favour and/or convey its decision on the Petitioner?s application. Even otherwise, the above inactions on the part of Respondent No.1 are arbitrary; unfair; discriminatory lead to unequal treatment and therefore violate Article 14 of the Constitution. On an average, the Petitioner submits that the process of certi?cation of a cinematograph ?lm takes about 2 weeks. As against this, the Petitioner has been awaiting Respondent No.1?s decision for nearly 4 weeks. There is no provision under the Cinematograph Act or the Rules which permits Respondent No. 1 to withhold its decision and/or not issue a certi?cate to the Petitioner indefinitely. Similarly placed persons and individuals such as the Petitiont rs have in the past received certi?cation for their respective ?lms much prior to the proposed release dates of those ?lms. Therefore, it is apparent that although the Petitioner is also such a person, it is being treated unequally, unfairly and unreasonably. As there is no reason and/or rationale and/or justi?cation for Respondent No.1 to withhold grant of certi?cate and/or decision in the matter, its inactions are by themselves contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution and are therefore unconstitutional. D) Respondent No.1?s inactions violate the Petitioners fundamental rights under Articles 19(1Ma) and 19(1Hg) of the Constitution. i) ii) a, s. BHAISARE MUMBAI it Tums R. No: 2330 The Petitioners respectfully submit that the right to exhibit the subject Film is enshrined and arises out of their right of freedom of speech and expression which is guaranteed by the Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. As such, Respondent No.1?s prompt certi?cation would enable the Petitioners to exercise their right to freedom of speech and expression. Under the constitutional scheme, the Petitioners? fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(a) can only be taken away in the manner contemplated by Article 19(2) i.e. a reasonable restriction imposed by law. The process/ requirement of certi?cation of the subject Film under the Cinematograph Act has been recognized to be such a reasonable restriction. However, exercise of power under the Cinematograph Act; for it to withstand the test of Article 19(2) of the Constitution must be in conformity with the Cinematograph Act and its Rules. As set out hereinabove, by not issuing and/ or delaying the issue of certi?cation and/ or not taking a decision within a reasonable time frame, Respondent No.1 is abdicating iv) its role and functions under the Cinematograph Act and Rules, and therefore, is not acting on the authority/ power granted by the Cinematograph Act. As such, Respondent No.1?s inactions are ultra vires the Cinematograph Act and Rules. Therefore, Respondent No.1?s inactions have no authority of law let alone under the Cinematograph Act; are plainly violative of the Petitioners? rights under Articles 14 and 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, and are not valid and/ or protected by Article 19(2) of the Constitution. It is now a settled position of law that statutory/ state authorities can not only be restrained from violating fundamental rights but are also liable to be made to take positive actions in order to ensure that fundamental rights of persons and citizens are guaranteed and preserved. In the present case, it is respectftu submitted that on this principle and in order to give effect to the Petitioner?s fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, Respondent No.1 ought to be directed to perform its statutory functions under the Cinematograph Act. The Petitioners respectfully submit that the business of producing and exhibiting cinematograph ?lms is a legitimate business and trade in the eyes of law. Therefore, exhibiting the Film is a fundamental right of the Petitioners under Articles 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The Petitioners? rights under Articles 19(i)(g) can only be taken away by way of a reasonable restriction prescribed by law under Articles 19(6) of the Constitution of India. In the above context, the Petitioners reiterate that they have expended (Rupees Twenty Four Crores Fifty Lakhs Only) in the 19 production of the subject Film; approximately (Rupees Five Crores Only) for the promotion and publicity of the subject Film and for the release of the subject Film on 17th June 2016. It is therefore, apparent that the Petitioners have expended substantial sums of money in producing the Film and ensuring its release. D) The Petitioners reiterate that by not issuing/ delaying the certi?cation of the subject Film, they are being prevented from exhibiting the subject Film. In addition to the economic and monetary loss, harm and prejudice which the Petitioners would suffer if they are unable to exhibit the subject Film on 17th June 2016, the Petitioners would also suffer on account of reputational loss and breach of contract qua third parties. This would constitute a violation of their fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(g) and 300A of the Constitution. E) The Petitioners submit that they are entitled to urgent and immediate reliefs of this Hon?ble Court and for grant of immediate mandatory reliefs. This is for more than one reason. First, a( cinematograph ?lm is a perishable commodity. Unless released on its slated date, the cinematograph ?lm?s losses are both of economic and commercial value. Second, the Petitioners have awaited Respondent No.1?s decision for a period far beyond what is contemplated under the statute viz. the Cinematograph Act. Third, if grant of immediate and urgent reliefs of the subject Film are not granted and the subject Film is not released on its scheduled date, not only will this expose the Petitioners to ?nancial losses and damages to the tune of . MUMBM 3?2? pproximately (Rupees Five Crores ,y-?ms 0?5" nly), but the same may also result in the Petitloners violating their contractual obligations qua third parties. In the event of non-grant of reliefs and non-release of the imam mi" F) G) 91) subject Film on its scheduled date, the Petitioners may ?nd very few takers of the subject Film in the industry and/ or trade. This is because, the Petitioners have already given. distribution date of the subject Film to various distributors and the distributors have undertaken further arrangements with theatre owners and satellite broad casting. If these are not honoured, the Petitioners not Only stand to loose the repute and standing in the ?lm industry but the subject Film also stands to find no takers thereafter. For all these reasons, it is necessary that mandatory reliefs (both ?nal and/ or interim) in terms of the present Petition are granted. For all of the reasons set out hereinabove, as Respondent No.1?s inactions are ultra-vires the Cinematograph Act and the Rules; are also arbitrary; unconstitutional; unfair and violative of Article 14; and cannot be considered as acts under the Cinematograph Act and Rules, the same are plainly violative of the Petitioners? fundamental rights under Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. Respondent No.1?s inactions infringe the Petitioners? Right to Progegy under Article 300A of the Constitution of India: i) The Petitioners respectfully submit that the subject Film constitutes their property for the production of which, as stated above the Petitioner has incurred substantial expenditure. The Petitioner is therefore, legally and constitutionally entitled to exploit the subject Film by the public exhibition thereof; By exhibiting the subject Film, the Petitioner expects to generate revenues and pro?ts. The subject Film is therefore a property of substantial value and interest to the Petitioner. It is a settled principle of law that property is a constitutionally recognized right of all persons in all India. The right to use and enjoy one?s property is an intrinsic aspect of ownership of property. That right can only be taken away by authority of law. This is the mandate of Article 300A of the Constitution of India. iv) In the present case that law can only be in the Cinematograph Act and the Rules. For all of the reasons set out hereinabove, as Respondent No.1?s inactions are ultra-vires the Cinematograph Act and the Rules; are also arbitrary; unfair and violative of Article 14, and cannot be considered as acts under the Cinematograph Act and Rules. The same are not pursuant to any authority of law, and are therefore, plainly violative of the Petitioners? constitutional rights to property under Article 300A of the Constitution. Respondent No.1 has neither provided any reasons and/or justi?cation for withholding/ delaying the certi?cation of the subject Film and/or issuing is decision on the Petitioner?s application, nor has it provided the Petitioner with the Opportunity of a hearing prior to deciding to do so. The Petitioner respectftu submits that as its fundamental and constitutional rights stand to be adversely affected and as it?s civil rights stand to be severely impacted on account of such withholding/ delay, it has a right to such reasons and/ or opportunity of hearing and conveying its representations. As this has not been done, the Petitioners respectfully submit that the impugned inactions of Respondent No.1 are plainly violative of the Petitioner?s right to natural justice and are on this count also, violative of the Constitutional mandate under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Petitioners crave leave to add to, amend, alter, modify and/or delete any or all of the foregoing grounds, if necessary, on the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the circumstances aforesaid, the Petitioners submit that this Hon?ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ and: i) order and declare that Respondent No.1?s inaction qua the issuance of certi?cation for public exhibition of the subject Film ?Udta Punjab? is unconstitutional, illegal and not binding on the Petitioners; ii) order and direct Respondent No.1 (through its Chairman) to'forthwith and/or in such time as this Hon?ble Court deems ?t and proper, exercise its power and authority under the Cinematograph Act and the Rules thereunder and pursuant thereto, issue in favour of the Petitioner, an certi?cate in respect of the subject Film ?Udta Punja and in the alternative and without prejudice, order and direct Respondent No. 1 to forthwith and/or in such time as this Hon?ble Court deems ?t and proper, exercise its power and authority under the Cinematograph Act and the Rules thereunder and pursuant thereto, issue a reasoned decision on the Petitioner?s Application dated 10th May, 2016 in respect of the subject Film ?Udta Punjab?. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Petitioners submit that they have made out a strong primafacie case in their favour for grant of interim and (id-interim reliefs, pending the hearing and ?nal disposal of the Petition. The Petitioners submit that if the temporary reliefs in the form of mandatory injunction as prayed for are not granted, they Q3 will suffer a grave and irreparable harm, prejudice, loss and injury. This is because without the same, the subject Film will not be permitted to be exhibited on 17th June, 2016. On the other hand, no such loss, injury or prejudice whatsoever will be caused to the Respondents. In the circumstances, the balance of convenience is entirely in favour of the Petitioners and not in favour of the Respondents. Therefore, the Petitioners must be granted interim and ad-interim reliefs in the aforesaid terms. The Petitioners submit that this Hon?ble Court has the jurisdiction to entertain, try and dispose of the present Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This is because, the present Writ Petition seeks the implementation of the Cinematograph Act and the Rules thereunder by directing Respondent No.1 to exercise its powers and authority under the said Act. Such a relief can only be sought and granted by this Hon?ble Court in its Writ Jurisdiction. In any event, the provisions of appeal contained in the Cinematograph Act do not contemplate and/or permit the Petitioners to approach the appellate authority if Respondent No.1 delays and/ or neglects to issue certi?cation and/ or decision pursuant to an application made. Therefore there is no alternate remedy available to the Petitioners. Therefore, on all counts, this Hon?ble Court has the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the Writ Petition and grant reliefs. The examining committee and the revising committee of Respondent No.1 have examined the subject Film in Mumbai. Therefore, the cause of action has arisen within this Hon?ble Court?s jurisdiction The Revising Committee has examined the subject Film on 3rd June, 2016. Thereafter, more than 3 days have passed. Even after the Petitioner?s letter dated 7th June, 2016, no response has been received. Accordingly, the Petitioners submit that they have moved with utmost speed and . 10' 11. 12. 13. 14. dispatch and there is no delay on their part in approaching this Hon?ble Court. The Petitioners have not ?led any other proceedings on the subject matter of the present Petition before this Hon?ble Court or any other High Court or in the Supreme Court of India. The present Petition therefore, is maintainable. No caveat has been ?led by the Respondents and the Petitioners have not been served with any caveat with respect to the above matter. The Petitioners undertake to serve a copy of the Petition, if so directed by this Hon?ble Court. The Petitioners have paid the ?xed court fees payable on this Petition. Mr. Vivek B. Agrawal, the Authorized Signatory of the Petitioner No. 1, has signed, veri?ed and declared the present Petition. The Petitioners will rely on documents, a list whereof is annexed hereto. The Petitioners, therefore, pray: 3) that this Hon?ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ and i) order and declare that Respondent No.1?s inaction qua the issuance of certification for public exhibition of the subject ?lm ?Udta Punjab? is unconstitutional, illegal and not binding on the Petitioners; :7 ii) order and direct Respondent No.1 (through its Chairman) to forthwith and/or in such time as this Hon?ble Court deems fit and proper, exercise its b) power and authority under the Cinematograph Act and the Rules thereunder and pursuant thereto, issue in favour of the Petitioner, an certi?cate in respect of the subject Film ?Udta Punjab?; in the alternative and without prejudice, order and direct Respondent No. 1 to forthwith and/or in such time as this Hon?ble Court deems ?t and pr0per, exercise its power and authority under the Cinematograph Act and the Rules thereunder and pursuant thereto, issue a reasoned decision on the Petitioner?s Application dated 10th May, 2016 in respect of the Film ?Udta Punjab?; that pending the hearing and ?nal disposal of the Petition, this Hon?ble Court be pleased to pass an order of temporary injunction and thereby: i) ii) order and direct Respondent No.1 (through its Chairman) to forthwith and/ or within such period of time as this Hon?ble Court deems ?t and proper, exercise its power and authority under the Cinematograph Act and the Rules thereunder and pursuant thereto, issue in favour of the Petitioner, an certi?cate in respect of the subject Film ?Udta Punjab?; in the alternative and without prejudice, order and direct Respondent No.1 to forthwith and within such period of time as this Hon?ble Court deems ?t and proper exercise its power and authority under the Cinematograph Act and the Rules thereunder and pursuant thereto, issue a reasoned decision on the Petitioner?s Application dated 10th May, 2016 in respect of the subject Film ?Udta Punjab?; c) for ad?interim reliefs in terms of prayer L) above; d) for costs; and for such further and other reliefs as this Hon?ble Court may deem ?t E2) and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Solemnly af?rmed at Mumbai This day of June, 2016 Before me, Advocate for the Petitioners .A .. . I ?aw-ul- w-anp-u 1 VERIFICATION awal, the Authorized Signatory of Petitioner No. 1 and Mr. WE, Mr. Vivek B. Agr f?ce at Grandeur, 8th Vikas Bahl, the Petitioner No. 2 abovenamed, having our 0 Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai Floor, Opp. Gundecha at is stated in the do hereby solemnly af?rm and declare that wh is true to the best of our knowledge and that the legal are based on information and 400 053, paragraphs to submissions made in paragraphs to legal advice and we believe the same to be true. Solemnly af?rmed at Mumbai This (1 6 a?s??imw M/s Naik Naik Co. Partner Advocates for the Petitioners EM Mow N. S. BHAISARE N0 59W OF INDIA I wag.) avg.4.-. . . mwgauawmnw, IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its ?lm ?Udta Punjab?. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd.& Anr VERSUS CIZ A WRIT PETITON Dated this June, 2016 Naik Naik Co., Advocates for the Caveator 135 136, Mittal Towers B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021. 2. Mr. Vivek B. Agrawal I We are not a member of the advocate?s welfare fund a ce the stamp of Rs. 2/-is not af?xed herewith. Advocates for the Petitioner IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its ?lm ?Udta Punjab?. 1. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its of?ce at) Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai - 400 053 A an adult Indian Inhabitant, having his of?ce address at Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 053. i Versus . .. win-Hem WW R3 1. The Central Board of ?lm Certi?cation through its Regional Of?ce at 91-12, Bharat Bhavan, Walkeshwar Road, Mumbai 400 006 2. Union of India, through the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, New Delhi Respondents To, . The Prothonotary Senior Master High Court, Bombay B. Agrawal, Authorised Signatory of the Petitioner no. 1 abovenamed having their of?ce at Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 053 do hereby appoint M/s. Naik Naik Co having its of?ce at Naik Naik Co, 116-B, Mittal Towers, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 to act, appear and plead for us in the above matter. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have set and subscribed our hands to this writing at Mumbai. - Dated this day of June, 2016 a For Naik Naik Co . 9 Partner . ?k R. m; 23.30 J) Advocates for the Pet Omar . mu." r1! um mm. "vi-PW. war-- -- . I IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION N0. OF 2016 Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. 8: Am ?Petitioner Versus Central Board of Film Certi?cation Anr VAKAIATNAMA Dated this day of June, 2016 Naik Naik 8: Co Advocates for the Petitioner Mittal Tower, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 BO are not a member of the advocate?s welfare fund and hen the stamp of Rs. 2/-is not af?xed herewith. r? Advocates for the Petitioner IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in proceSsing the Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its ?lm ?Udta Punjab?. 1. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its of?ce at) Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 053 2. Mr. Vikas Bahl an adult Indian Inhabitant, having his of?ce address at Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 053. .. Petitioners Versus . WI . ?Tawny-rm" - '1 - 1. The Central Board of ?lm Certi?cation through its Regional Of?ce at Bharat Bhavan, Walkeshwar Road, Mumbai 400 006 2. Union of India, through the'Ministry of Information and) Broadcasting, New Delhi Respondents To, The Prothonotary 8: Senior Master High Court, Bombay ilr?ifikas Bahl, Petitioner no. 2 abovenamed having my of?ce at Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 053 do hereby appoint M/s. Naik Naik 8: Co'liaving its of?ce at Naik Naik 8: Co, 116-B, Mittal Towers, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 to act, appear and plead for us in the above matter. IN WITNESS WHEREOF I have set and subscribed our hands to this writing at Mumbai. Dated this day of June, 2016 For Naik Naik 8: Co Partner Advocates for the Petitioner VP. .1 par?- u. I-v- w?w?qvmv-l r. . . 39) IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application for certification of its ?lm ?Udta Punjab?. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. VERSUS on F6 [Mr 5 MEMORANDUM OF REGISTERED ADDRESS Naik Naik Co Advocates for the Petitioner ll6-B, Mittal Tower, Nariman Point, Mumbai 400 021 THANE else. 93? a- un: 2330 (v Naik Naik Co. Partner . Advocates for the Petitioners b5. 83 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 W: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its ?lm ?Udta Punja Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd.& Anr VERSUS Altar LIST OF DOCUMENTS SR. NO PARTICULARS 1 Articles wherein the release date of the Subject Fil 2 Copy of the Application for Certi?cation dated 10?u May, 2016 3 Copy of Respondent No. 1?s letter dated 24th May 2016 referring the Subject Film to the Revising Committee. 4 A copy of the Declaration requested by Respondent No. 1 5 A copy of the CAT Appeal dated 24th May 2016 5 A copy of the letter dated 25th May 2016 calling upon the secretary of FCAT to look into the appeal being FCAT Application No.19 and expedite the process of certi?cation. 7 A copy of the letter from the Petitioners? Advocates, withdrawing the appeal before the FCAT, with liberty to move it before the Revising Committee. 8 A copy of the Petitioner?s letter dated 7th June 2016 calling upon Respondent No. 1 to issue the requisite and or convey its decision qua certi?cation of the subject Film to the Petitioner, within 24 hours from the receipt of the letter 9 Copy of Articles and media reports stating that Respondent No.1 has EH recommended severe cuts to the subject Film 10 A copy of the Synopsis of the subject Film 11 Copies of Articles dealing with the problem of drug addiction faced in the State of Punjab 12 Copies of Articles showing political establishments in the State of Punjab and expressed their objections and opposition to the release and public exhibition of the subject Film. Naik Naik Co., Partner Advocates for the Petitioners WA 'iW' ?W-r-U'tuu . . -: ma- - . .2 . urea]: my: Agni: 3133;; .175? '2 Ew?r? 35 03/002016 ?Udia Punjab:' After Shahid Kapoor. Punjabi SIN Diljil Dosanjh's ?rst look poster as tough cop released INDIA WORLD BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT AUTO HEALTH PHOTOS ELECTIONS VIDEO :1 ., *5 .- 'Udta Punjab:' After Shahid Kapoor, Punjabi star Diljit Dosanjh's first look poster as tough cop released IBTTV April 13, 2016 13:02 IST By Sushmita Sen? June film preview: The Nice Guys, The Conju'ring 2 and Independence Day: Resurgence FOLLOW US: Shahid Kapoor as rockstar and Diljit Dosanjh as cop in 'Udta Punjab." Pictured: Shahid and DilJit's 'Udta Punjab' . 4' a! i? character posters PR Handout Punjabi superstar Diljit Dosanjh has a huge fa n-foilowing and as a Baisakhi treat. the Rinku-Akash of Marathi Another Hrithik-Kang makers of "Udta Punjab" have released the firs: look poster of the actor. The film. which b'0?kbufte? 'Saifat' ?We 9 also stars Shahid Kapoor. Alia Ebert and Kareena Kapoor Khan. is Diljit's Bollywood debut mm on The Kap" Sham? adwsor mes comma" film. The makers of the film have unveiled Shahid's character's motion poster Tuesday. it Sponsored: seems the team was waiting for the Punjabi New Year to release Diljit?s motion poster. He will be seen as a cop in the much-awaited movie. which revolves around the Mumbai Girl Gets 4 Shades Fairer in increasing problem of drug abuse in Punjab. Earlier. several pictures of the actor with co- Using This Weird Old Trick! star Kareeria from the sets had gone viral on social media. In Abhishek Chaubey's "Udta Punjab," Shahid will be seen in the role ofa rockstar. Tommy Singh. who gets involved in a drug-related Private emaiis from Kangana Ranam controversy. Alia's character l5 of a daily wage labourer from Blhar who comes to Punjab Roman leaked; shocking in search for work. but ends up becoming a victim of drug traf?cking. And, Kareena will be seen as a doctor from Amritsar. The trailer of the movie is scheduled to be released April 16 and the film is slated to hit . . h. Rahul From Mumbai Lost 25 Kg's In screens June 17. A ew days ago, the motion logo was released, ich owe a With This Revolutionary Diet! film's name, followed by the line, "Drugs Di Maa Di." it is produced by Ekta Kapoor? A Motion Pictures and Anurag Kashyap. Vikramaditya Motwane. Vikas Bahl and Ma 5? Mantena's Phantom Films. Sanjay Leela Bhansali to direct Shah: remake of SS Rajamouli?s 1/3 .1,qu . 9-4 08/062015 'Udta Punjab? After Shahid Kapoor. Pwy'abi star Diljil Dosanjh's ?rst look poster as tough cop released 5 Skin Shades Fairer lnjust 14 Days Sridevi Vijayakumar Baby Shower ph Photos 1 Trick To Get 5 Shades Fairer In 14 This Daily Bobby Simha and Reshmi Menon we photos - Photos ~?mfma?onnmnupunm - PM. His Skin Got 5 Shades Lighter in just 5? ,r w, . Diljlt Dosanjh @diljitdosanjh #UdtaPunjab #UdtaDiljil Trailer #16April 3 Days To GOA bitinUdtaDiljit @balajimotionpic @FuhSePhantom ?308 AM 13 AW 2015 Aa' movie 'Housefull 3? 245 478 review: Nithin- movie review: Samantha- Some audience Udtcz Punjab Character Poster I Diljit Dosanjh 'Iraivi' movie 'Housequ 3' review: Live review round-up: audience Here is what Box office Comedy actor collection: Razak Khan dies 'Housefull 3' is of heart attack: On the Other hand. Diljlt is currently flying high on the success of his Punjabi film "Ambarsariya" that also featured Lauren Gottlieb, Navneet Kaur Dhillon and Monica Gill in pivotal roles. The regional film has garnered immense appreciation from critics as well I. - 1" as the aUd'ence? Box office Star Plus' 'Silsila collection: Pyar Ka' and Also. it has been reported that Anushka Sharma will share screen space with Diljit in her Akshay's 'Dahleez? to be next production flick "Phillauri." Directed by debutant Anshai Lal, the film will also feature the "Lle Of Pi" actor Suraj Sharma and the movie is set in Phillaur. Punjab. PHOTO GALLERY RELATED Dhanush, Amala Paul at Amma Islamic State Militants Kanakku Press Meet Civilians Fleeing Falluje 'Udta Punjab' poster released: Shahid Kapoor as Tommy Singh ena Kapoor- starter A dljit-dosanjhs- if it. s. IHMSME MUMBAI THANE DlS?l'. It. No: 2330 1 11" Ok~_ n? a_l 030612016 Udta Punjab - The Hindu THE HINDU Published: April 12, 2016 00:00 IST Updated: April 12, 2016 05:39 IST April 12, 2016 Udta Punjab mums Emir: :5 yang The ?rst look of another highly antieipated ?lm was released yesterday: Ahhishek Chaubey?s drug drama Udta Punjab . The poster gives us a glimpse of the feet of a rockstar suspended in air with a View of a full-house concert. Starring Shahid Kapur, Kareena Kapoor and Alia Bhatt. the ?lm, going by Chaubey's style and the comic book feel of the poster, can be expected to be as dark and quirky as his Ishqiya ?lms. The trailer will be out on April 16, and the ?lm will release on June 17. Printable version nn 8. 2016 9:25:22 AM punjab/article8464138.ece The Hindu 111 E764 ~15 3g Regd. Hand No. Li ?7 CENTRAL some OF FILM "Referred to 9145. Bharat Bhavan. Walkeswar Road, Mumbai 400 006 Date: zu?g-M From: The Regional Office, Central Board of Film Certification. MUMBAI To. PHANTOM FILMS PVT. LTD. - J-6. HEMLATA ADITYA BUNGLOWS. MILLAT NAGAR. ANDHERI WEST - 400053 MumbaiiMaharashtra Subject UDTA PUNJAB HINDI Sir/s, With reference to your application dated 10/05/2016 for a certi?cation of the ?lm noted above which has since been examined by the Examining Committee. I am directed to state that the film has been referred by the Chairperson on his/her own to Revising Committee under rule 24(1) of the cinematograph (Certi?cation) rules. 1983. The date. time and place of examination of the film will be intimated to you in due course. You are. therefore.? in the mean while requested to kindly furnish 15 copies of synopsis and songs of the film along with the 0.0 at an early date to enable us to take further action in the matter. You are also requested to give a declaration that the print of the film being presented to the Revising Committee for examination is the same that was shown to Examining Committee and that no alteration of any kind has been affected in the print. Yours faithful in? 5? For Regional Officer 4763?} eli?E?iaiEp' I item we are ., ?it awe C. 3?1 Computer Generated Print.. CBFC Web Application No. rant-tar FORM-1A (W0) $131?) Form of application for certification for public exhibition of a Video film produced in India (See sub-rule (1) of rule 21 No. and Date of application to be entered by Board's office 13mm. To. The Central Board of Film Certification through the Regional Officer at MUMBAI Application for Certification for public exhibition of a Video film produced in india at Mumbai rm. Name of the video film UDTA PUNJAB a. Language of the video film HINDI Ir. menu (0) Running Time 148:30 Have any cuts made voluntarily by the applicant and if so give details. No am?rm Number of Casse?tes 1 irariezi?r?tr??dri?ma??m?w No BHAESAFRE 52' THANE ore-?r R. No: 2330 1. Pi?: Type of the film i.e whether 20, SD, Cinemascope, vistavision etc. Cinemascope Gr. an fits-7H 343 2n (9) Whether the film is silent or talkie Talkie sir. ?rmer Fr Colour of the ?lm Colour a?e?rarwamai?qat Name and address of the Producer PHANTOM FILMS PVT. LTD. J-6. HEMLATA BUNGLOWS, MILLAT NAGAR. ANDHERI WEST - 400053, Mumbai, Maharashtra a. an an? 0) Name of the Director ABHISHEK GHAUBEY 2. 2. State whether the video film is a newsreell documentary/ scientific/ educational] feature! advertisement video film Feature 2(3f) q, Irv, U, 2(a) Specify the Certificate requested or A (Restricted to adults) latent??aean?au?m?a?i?mW-m?l 3. State separately the number of negative and positive prints of the video film. $.fi?r?fta (awe-a mafia Produced negative positive asnaamaasi?mar? (acme mafia In the applicant's possession(negative positive Ham/marmammqarqw?mimn?ti (0) Name and address of the processing laboratory company where the copies were made PRIME FOCUS LIMITED I FUTURE WORKS MEDIA LTD Mumbai s: amusing?? -- (f MUMBAI I . tame DIST )3 it o. No: 2330 4. (3) Whether the video ?lm for which the application has been made is a replica/exact copy of a cinematograph film on celluloid in respect of which a certificate has already been granted by the Central Board of Film Certification. Also state particulars of the ?lm certified. Whether the video film is a modi?ed version of a certified Cinematograph film on celluloid containing additional deletion/other alterations. Details of modifications may be provided. Whether the application being made is in respect of an original video film and not a copy of an already certified cinematograph film on celluloid. Yes (ma?mma??wmwm??mwwam? I u??wtteirsa?tts?r?rm?t Whether the present video ?lm is a dubbed version or a remake of any other video film? If so. state the particulars along with full details of certificate issued to that video film. Whether any pre-censorship advice was obtained and if so the details thereof. Whether permission for any shooting abroad was obtained and if so, the details thereof. martini (9) Whether the video film contains any dialogue/ commentary in any language other than the language of the video film and if so, specify the language of the video film and the cassette in which they occur. No. 5. Ir?r?z?w?ata?i. 5. Has any previous application been made to certify this video film suitable for public exhibition in India? ls so. :No N. BHMSAHE . t' MUMBAI E3 magma i it? n. Etc: 2330 no, Where and to whom was it made? 311m er am an '2 What was the result of the application LIL/aparme 1. was granted with the following cuts. 2. datum mm 2. Certificate was refused o. mu '2 {of it 6. Has the exhibition of this video film been at any time suspended or this video film declared uncertified by the Central or any State Government? State Particulars. 7. Does the video film contain any dialogue. song, poem. speech or commentary in any language other than English or in lndian language? War, mam? sitar? If so. specify that cassette or cassettes in which the dialogue, song, poem, speech or commentary and the language or languages used. smasaaratr?cniamarm?mwa?w?m 8. Amount of fee accompanying the application on account of the fee prescribed in Rule 36.: Rs.33700 Mode?501m Date mammal; Bi??lpomi? i i Name at . 0585 Fee DD f3?2Z00?16/04i?2?010f" 20000 Yes?Bank 7 MUMBAI git/lumbar; Certification "552401 16/04/2010'{ T4700 1' MUMBAI git/lumbar 9. mm?wmq?s 9. Whether any animal has been used in shooting the film? If so. whether declaration specified in clause(bb) of sub-rule(3) of rule (21) has been filed? No IO. 10. Name. address and telephone number, if any of the applicant PHANTOM FILMS PVT. LTD. J-G, HEMLATA ADITYA BUNGLOWS, MILLAT NAGAR, ANDHERI WEST - 400053. Mumbai, Maharashtra Telephone No. Mobile No.- N. a. BHAISAWE smear e- is, i? THANE DIST. dr?ainmm ?gzm?ami?t?m??mm?w 11. declare that the video film is ready for examination by the Board and the statements recorded above are true in every particular. I also declare that I own the rights of the video film in question. I further declare that have the right to use in the video ?lm the additional material in the feature film in the form of trailers, advertisements shorts, documentary films etc? Place MUMBAI Waterman 7 Signature of the applicant Date 1010512016 Name Designation .r a. DHAESARE a? ailment 3 gm, "rt-warez; orsr. n. tee: 2330 J) {mnsarsq?wzaatazi'} SCHEDULE FORM I See sub-rule 2 of rule 5 Form of application for payment of CESS under the Cine Workers Welfare Cess Act 1981 (To be submitted at the time of making an application for certificate for public exhibition of the film No. and Date (to be entered by Board?s of?ce Wit {WW?a?n To: The Central Board of Film Certification (Through Regional Of?cer MUMBAI 1.Name and Address of the applicant: PHANTOM FILMS PVT. LTD. J-6, HEMLATA ADITYA BUNGLOWS, MILLAT NAGAR, ANDHERI WEST - 400053.Mumbai,Maharashtra 2me 2. Name of the film UDTA PUNJAB GET 311W 3. Language of the Film HINDI 4. Warm email? trar 4. Name and address of the producer: PHANTOM FILMS PVT. LTD. J-6, HEMLATA ADITYA BUNGLOWS, MILLAT NAGAR. ANDHERI WEST 400053,Mumbai,Maharashtra 5. em: 311R ?rm WET-TIE 5. Number Date of Demand Draft (Cess Fee) Mode DDIPO empower?? ?Branch? bangle at Psmancina?t. I a Yes Bank . . 6. ma?mw??r?m??m? awaimf?w?mmwmai?, 6. Authority in whose favour DD is drawn THE CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM CERTIFICATION, MUMBAI. ?i MUMBAI a LA: THANE DIST. o. No: 2330 7. 7. Has any previous application been made to certify the film for public exhibition No a 211%: at. a?r 31132.? f?atrr a. If yes. to whom the application was made a. strata? a?r mm b. The result of such application I declare that my statement recorded above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. (PIE-[Place - MUMBAI SIGNATURE OF THE APPLICANT (mmate 1010512016 Telephone No.: MaeBiceeis?f??bald: . Films lag. 10,0095 I declare that the same ?lm will be presented to the Tribunal for preview as has been finally seen by the CBFC. The information given in the form above is true to the best of my knowledge. I also declare that I own the rights of the ?lm in question have been duly authorized by the right holder3, to prefer this appeal before the Tribunal. Q9 hfsiak?wmw' Signature of?the Appellant Place: Date: 0g ~2Di6 MUMBAI THANE DIST 3 Strike out whichever is inapplicable. Appendix we '1 Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (Ministry of Information and Broadcasting) fA Ii forFilin A fr AT (under Section 5C of the Cinematograph Act) {For of?ge use only) Appeal No. To Sir, The Secretary Film Certification Appellate Tribunal Ministry of 1&8 Room No.719, Wing Shastri Bhawan New Delhi - 110 001 Appeal under Section 5C of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, against titled Dr 9U A3 Pi I. 1. the order of CBFC in lln' respect of long/short film1 Name, address and telephone pfiph'ig?hc?ii number of the person ?ling the Appeal 3) b) State whether the person filing the appeal is the Producer Director Right holder? State whether the person filing the Appeal before the Tribunal and the person who filed the l3; i, Maggie} Raoul, Nlolg' 0 Mamba- ?cocci 1 Strike out whichever is not applicable. application before the same? c) If the answer to the above is No, please give the name, address and telephone numbers of the person who filed application before CBFC- State whether the Appeal is filed within 30 days of the date of Order, as required under Section 1) of the Act. b) If the answer to the above is No, please give sufficientcause as to why you could not file the appeal within the prescribed period, as required ?under proviso to Section of the Act."- II. Particulars of the Film 1. Name of the Film 2. Language of the Film 3. Length of the Film as submitted to CBFC 4. Running time of the film 5. Number of Reels 6. Gauge of the film 7. Name, address and telephone numbers of the Producer 8. Name, address and telephone numbers of the Director 2 This clause is valid for Appeals filed within a further period of 30 days. The \V?vxm int-4' applications received after this are Sack; Sowlax qun?i'bnn thm?s fv-r Lid? C, Ham id?k Owl; i7? bm?l Mind 15mm} 9.1.. ?hi-LN". U443 Mumbt?" HGL: Mus ?157.30 70: K) PUNSRB i?n all i) Feet ii) Meters ?1 Hours ~28 Minutes. 30 31g HM 2?]raw: in F'ktws?roe {Artur/?1 Viv 51mg kw. Ckougf-j ?55? 0% 7L1 Dr rc- ?Jk/I?d' PL- .0224 10 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. State whether the film is a News Reel documentary scientific educational feature advertisement film Specify the category of certi?cate requested from CBFC - State briefly decision of CBFC State the Order No. and date of CBFC, against which appeal is being filed State the reasons for refusal for certificate or the categorization of the ?lm requested for, indicating the speci?c Rules or guidelines violated, as per orders of CBFC (Attach separate sheet, if needed). Brief statement, in defence, for each rule guideline (Attach separate sheet if needed)- State whether the ?lm is ready for preview immediately by the Tribunal, at the date, time and venue to be indicated by the T?bunaL State whether you will abide by the decision of the Tribunal, even if only two members are present in the meeting of the THbunaL State your preference where you would like the hearing of the appeal to take place (please put a against your oonn) bl?il FE Pr 510K no-i- 1SSou biLlIEtzlloi??MuM/qzq Dower- o2v\- Lu l6 ?Aim 11? 70/ rj Co on mi??tc No 010,9..- is given Vice/5c (?ng ox-H'vtwal' a. At Tribunal Hg. in New Delhi b. At the Regional Office of CBFC where the film was presented for certi?cation Pari ular fF 1. Amount of Fee appropriate column a) Rs.100/? for films (Tick length up to 2000 ft. b) Rs.750/- for films the with with lengt_h_more than 2000 ft. 2. No. and date of Demand Draft 3. Details of the Bank on which the DD is drawn (in favour of the Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Ministry of 1&8, payable at New Delhi) IV. Englg?uge? (strike out inapplicable) 1. Six copies of appeal 2. Six copies of the Synopsis of the film 3. One copy of the authenticated original script of the ?lm in the language of the Film. 4. Six copies of the translated into English 5. Six clearly typed Script and authenticated copies of English translation of the songs, if any. 6. One Video Cassette VCD DVD of the film as submitted to CBFC 7. Six copies of order, appealed against 8. Affidavit as at Annexe 9. Demand draft for the prescribed fee drawn in favour of the Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Ministry of payable at New Delhi 10. Any other document (please spec?y) 3 Rs. 3W0 (Stiles? 2016 Hit/3 30m?: HM-rf?lom? ., I . 6 _r Kandy War?, Mum i - I declare that the same ?lm will be presented to the Tribunal for preview as has been finally seen by the CBFC. The information given in the form above is true to the best of my knowledge. I also declare that I own the rights of the ?lm in question have been duly authorized by the right holder3, to prefer this appeal before the Tribunal. ARE Signature of the Appellant Place: Date: 2% -- oi N. s. amnesia-22?} ., MUMBAI 323? 3 Strike out whiche l% .6: . .l . q; - a a if") h?l ?11: 3. 3.13495" I I '37} Tim'vi Y?fLeiliifi MAHARASHTRA 2015 0 WW W, ?le? ans-?003 - 7 MAY 2015 3? . nerd atlERh?m a; AFFIDAVIT l, Abhishek Chaubey son of Anand Mohan Chaubey, resident of India aged about 39 years, am the Director of the long film titled in Hindi language (hereinafter called ?the Film?), do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath: . THAT I Shri Abhishek Chaubey had applied for a Certificate to.the Central Board of Film Certification (hereinafter called ?the Board?) with its Regional Office at Mumbai for the Film on 10-05-2016; 0 THAT the Board has refused to issue a Certificate issued a certificate of a category other than that requested. . ??mE 563'; MUMBA: a (t 'k f?sk 63 1? will be submitted to the Tribunal :15 has been 9 . . ?3 - the same Film a Certificate; mitted before the Board for issue of well as the translated script of the Film is the same as THAT the original as rd?for issue of a Certificate; and submitted to the Boa THAT the statements given above are true and correct to the best Of my knowledge and belief. vtww?ht?n eponent Verified today the Sworn before me OTA RY HKMEZDUBEY wsummdm Mm PHANTOM Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. Date:25.05.2016 Grandeur. 8th Floor Opp. Gundecha T0. Veera Desai Road. The Secretary Andheri Most), Mumbai - 400 053. Film Certi?cation Appellate Tribunal Tel: +9 l-22-4966 6000 Ministry of Information Broadcasting Room No. 719, A Wing Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi 110 001 Dear Sir or Madam: This is in regards to our FCAT Application No :19 for the ?lm Udta Punjab, which is scheduled to release on 17th June 2016. The application has been submitted to your of?ce and as the matter 18 in your of?ce, we would request you to please expediate the process for our censor certi?cation to meet our deadlines. Thanking you Yours Sincerel Mr .Vivek Agrawal Co -Producer Registered Of?ce Grandeur, 8th Floor. Opp. Gundecha Veera Desal Road, Andheri (West). Mumbai - 400 053. 1.. . a I PHANTOM Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. Grandeur. 8th Floor Opp. Gundecha Veera Desal Road. Andheri (West). Mumbai - 400 053. Tel: +9l-22-4966 6000 [By Hand Delivery] Email/ Courier] Dated: - 7m June, 2016 T0. . Central Board of Film Certification Bharat Bhavan, 91-E Walkeshwar Road, Mumbal - 400 006 Email Id: Kind Attn: Mr. Pahiaj Nihalani, Chairman 0 f' Dear Sir, We, Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. (?Phantom?) are the producers of the Cinematograph ?lm ?Udta Punjab? As you are aware, on 10?" May, 2016, Phantom had applied to the CBFC and had thereby sought certi?cation of the said ?lm, seeking an certi?cate. Phantom also informed the CBFC that the Film was scheduled to be released on 17th June, 2016. Despite this position, after much delay, by it's letter dated 24'" May 2016, the Regional Of?ce of the CBFC referred the Film to the Revising Committee under Rule 24(1) of the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983 (?Rules?). By 1? June, 2016, Phantom completed all requisite formalities and submitted all required documents with the CBFC, to enable the Revising Committee to examine the ?lm. However, the Revising Committee examined the Film only on 3'd June, 2016. Till date, despite being fully aware of the fact that the said Film is scheduled to be released on 17?? June 2016, the CBFC has failed and neglected to convey to Phantom, its decision In the matter. \jm . oor. Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road. Andheri (West), Mumbai - 400 053. 1, CIN umoommon s. anarsnne MUMBAI mane DiS?i?. R. No: 2330 PHANTOM Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. Grandeur; 8th Floor Opp. Gundecha Veer: Desai Road. Andheri (West), Mumbal - 400 053. Tel: +9l-22-4966 6000 As the ?lm's release was scheduled on 17th June, 2016, the promotion of the Film has already commenced and an amount of (Rupee Five Crores Only) has been/ is being incurred towards its promotion and publicity. Also, Phantom has already booked about 1000 theatres and 1800 screens for the Film?s release. The aforesaid facts and circumstances plainly indicate that the CBFC is delaying its decision In the matter. If the CBFC fails to forthwith Indicate its decision, grave and irreparable harm, loss and injury will be caused to Phantom as the release date of the Film will have to be postponed .to a date beyond 17*" June, 2016. This will not only lead to a huge monetary loss and damage but will also adversely impact Phantom's reputation in the market. Under the Cinematograph Act and the Rules prescribed thereunder, the CBFC is mandated to convey its decision regarding the certi?cation of the Film, within a reasonable time frame, bearing in mind the proposed release date of the Film. Phantom has a right tohave the Film certi?ed one way or another, within such reasonable time. By not conveying its decision in the matter, the CBFC is wrongfully not exercising its power and is acting contrary to its mandate under the Cinematograph Act. Moreover, this will only frustrate and render nugatory, Phantom?s fundamental and constitutional rights to have the Film exhibited to the public. In the circumstances, and bearing in mind the grave urgency, Phantom hereby requests the CBFC to urgently and in any event, within 24 hours, convey its decision regarding the certi?cation of the Film and also provide a copy of the same certi?cate to Phantom. Yours Sincerely, For Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. Authorized Signatory (Vivek B. Agrawal) Registered 1:53?" I 5i pp. Gundacha Veera Desai Road. Andhori (West), Mumbai -400 053. . IPTC2I4578 ?x m, a. Meow Er tennis 3' R. No: 2330 - . 2 A: if W16 Drop'Punjab' from Printed from THE TIMES OF INDIA Drop 'Punjab' from"Udta Punjab': CBFC TNN Jun 7, 2016, 02.58 AM IST handigarh: A huge political battle has broken out between SAD- BJP alliance government and the opposition after Central Board for Film Certi?cation (CBFC) on Monday asked the producers to drop 'Punjab' from the title of the ?lm 'Udta Punjab'. This is the second time that the ?lm has left the board queasy. On May 26, it had objected the excessive use of profanities in the-?lm and sought 89 cuts to give it a certi?cate. While CBFC member Ashoke Pandit criticised his own colleagues'for g" "embarking on dangerous territory of hemming creative freedom", y" and Congress slammed the ruling SAD-BJP government for being behig??dii" .1 Drop ?Punjab'from ?Udta Punjab? can: . the "censorship move". With assembly elections to be held in Punjab in January 2017 and drugs being an extremely sensitive political subject, politicians seem divided on the impact the ?lm can have on poll results. his; urag Kashyap told reporters in Mumbai that "if any ?lm is changed it is Catl?e-Aam of it. No Mg?gh?h?iie cuts and leave it at that". 1? 08/06/2016 After Censor Pr0posed 89 Cuts On Udta Punjab, Trolls Had Their Field Day 8. We Don't Blame Them! EXH- 1-2. 3?3 Home entertainment_> celebscoop After Censor Proposed 89 Cuts 'On Udta Punjab, Trolls Had Their Field Day We Don't Blame Them! Isha Shanna June 6, 2016 facebook twitter reddit gplus I am sulking while writing this story because I am totally fed up of Udta Punjab and the mindless controversies surrounding the ?lm. We all were hell excited after the trailer but Censor board has proved to be such a spoiler. Last month, the Indian haubc ?s Udta Punjab unless they make 40 - cuts before its release. Well, the rumors subsided and we took a sigh of relief. However after demanding to cut the expletives, visuals of drug consumption, and W000 bad if you love Chitta Ve), now something even more terrible has happened. - After the makers approached a revising committee, they were told to remove all references to Punjab and its cities, politics, and electionsfrom the ?lm and even drop the word ?Punjab? from the However, according to the latest report, Revising panels uts to '#UdtaPunj ab', ys, TWitter we. ?lms. That's Censor Board Stuti Mishra (@ssttuuttii) June 5, 2916 What with 89 proposed cuts ELM taEunjab has becomes .- 1. 08/06/2016 A?er Censor Proposed 89 Cuts On Udta Punjab, Trolls Had Their Field Day We Don't Blame Them! Drugs are the number 1 problem in Punjab so you can't make a ?lm about it as the ruling party views it as a threat. - Fuck this censorship. Shivam (@GhantaGuy) June 6, 2916 Censor Board wants the makers to remove Punjab from ?letaPuniab. Bhai aap log ek kaam karo, change your name from Censor Board to Banchod! area adu Lune 6, 2016 After so many cuts, they should release ElldtaPunjaL) on snapchat. Apoorv Bafna (@apoorv__bafna) June 6, 2016 With 89 cuts the movie must have become short film. #UdtaPunjab Harinderpal Singh (@VirtualSingh) ,Iune 6, 2016 #[JdtaPunjab Punjab toh iase hataya jaise drugs saath hatt gye.. superinsaan (@jabbaarkhagoshi) Luge 6, 201 6 Pic 1: Movie before censor cut Pic 2: Movie after censor ??dtaPunjab ABHISHEK MAZUMDAR June 6, 2016 Remove Punjab from Udta Punjab. Yeah, then nobody will come to know which state is shown in the ?lm. Genius! Gappistan Radio (@GappistanRadio) June 6, 2016 Udta Punjab spoilers - the censor board. Tanvi (@sinpulsive) June 6, 2916 Censor board decides that 'Udta Punjab' can't mention the name Punjab. Since the movie is about getting high, call it Udta Pahlaj maybe? Mihir Bijur (@MihirBijur) lung 6, 2016 Since Udta Punjab can no longer have Punjab in it, let's help the censor board with new titles. My suggestion - Tenu kee, Sting Ray (@Purba__Ray) June 2016? Billu 2009 Udta 2016 Nothing changes. #[JdtaP_un_jab Rohitav Shanna (@rohitavsharrna) June 6, 2016 They should release the movie Udta Punjab on Snapchat. 111136 6, 2016 Udta Punjab should be renamed to A movie has no name. June 6, 2016, RIP freedom of speech. facebgok twitter [eddit gplus Comment Here Follow @indiatimes Enter Email For Updates Next on lndiatimes Entertainment: Salman's Breaks Silence On Rio Olvmoics Holntroversv. RGV's New Name 6/8/2016 Udta Punjab makers asked to make 89 cuts, Twitteraii jokes to release it on Snapchat The lndian Express .. U) I TRENDING GLOBALLY GLOBALLY) TRENDING IN INDIA 33 . (/trend'ngl) VIRAL VIDEOS VIDEOS-TRENDING) Home (I) Trending Trending-ln-lndia THIS IS SERIOUS Udta Punjab makers asked to make 89 cuts, Twitterati jokes to release it on Snapchat IS-SERIOUS) Udta Punjab makers asked to make 89 cuts,TWitterati jokes to release it on Snapchat .r .. By: Express Web Desk 322 ?i 4 36 (lagency/express-web- desk!) 5" PUbiiShedzJun 7' 2016' 12:27 TRENDING . A Ifvideos-trending/watch- mahabharata-meets- game-of-thr?ones?in-this- epic-video-283991OI) Watch: Mahabharata meets Game of Thrones in this 'epic' video videos-trending/watch- mahabharata-meets- game-of-thrones-in-this- Shahid Kapoor dt has been in the news for a while for its plot which centres around Punjab .9: Follow I I raThey shoulerelease the movie Udta Punjab on Snape?hat. infamous drug problem. Putting'the rumours of it?s ban to rest, the Centre a; ?s Revising Committee has asked the filmmakers to maki ER and ving all references to the state. - ?mvmah be?ab - in the light of upcoming assembly elections 1n the survived-a?fataI-accident1me1nPun ab. caused-by-uber-driver- I cur 1 now-he-wants-response- I . I i is Pad ht. 28394060 Thin 1y not happy with the decision giving way to the hash 6180016 accident caused by Uber driver, now he wants response (mp; [lindianexpressfcom starring Kareena Kapoor is?serious/thisman- survived-a-fataI-accident- caused-by-uber?driver- now-he?wants-response- 28394060 RELATED VIDEOS . - 1 ?1 video/pm-modi-meets-u- s?president?obamal) PM Modi Meets U.S. President Obama s-president?obamal) video/language?no- concern-coach-should- understand-our-culture- says-dhonil) Language No Concern, Coach Should Understand Our Culture, Says Dhoni video/language-no- concern:coach-should? understand-our-culture- video/three-die-as- eucalyptus-tree-falls-on- innoval) Three Die As Eucalyptus Tree Falls On Innova video/three-die-as- eucalyptus-tree-falls-on- innoval) Udta Punjab makers asked to make 89 cuts, Twitterati jokes to release it on Snapchat The Indian Express move. kapoorD Khan, Alia Bhatt and Diljit Dosanjh, Udta Punjab is expected to r: june 17. Sir Ravindra' Jadeja @SirJadeja They're Perfectly Fine With A State Getting Ruined By Drugs Misuse Ma?a.What Baffles Them Is A Movie Made On lt.Sigh! #UdtaPunjabCensored 11:25 PM - 6 Jun 2016 2.037 1.971 SUdhir FoIlow @Iamtssudhir Will #UdtaPunjab be #UdtaBeep now? #UdtaPunjabcensored 8:05 PM - 6 Jun 2016 8 5 Rofl @Ro?Gandhi_ Censor has asked for 89 cuts in #UdtaPunjab, all they allowed is 'balle bale makke di roti, haddipa bhangra pao ji'. That's real Punjab. No? 5:20 PM - 6 Jun 2016' 531 368 Follow Basically Censor Board asked the producer to turn off the location. #UdtaPunjab 6:49 PM - 6 Jun 2016 247 230 @Beingj?umor Ramesh Srivats @rameshsrivats Follow Censor Board wants Punjab from Udta Punjab. Thank God these is; hen Bombay to Goa was released. 1.7 N. s. sir-names; (V. 6:11 201 . 621 mums/qr I, met. Samir Sara @samirsaran #KimJenoUn to send ton aide to meet and learn the art a v?mwuin 6 video/pm-modi-arrives- at-white-house-to-meet? president-obama/) PM Modi Arrives At White House To Meet President Obama video/pm-modi-arrives- at-white-house-to-meet- president-Obamal) Udta Punjab makers asked to make 89 cuts, Twitterati jokes to release it on Snapchat The Indian Express of censorship #UdtaPunjabCensored 11:02 AM - 7 Jun 2016 11 8 l. va? Sand-d Singh @Sand_ln_Deed Follow Censor Board is cerrect in removing Punjab reference from Udta Punjab, I mean everyone knows only Haridwar is a victim of drug abuse. 6:20 PM - 6 Jun 2016 27 24 Ra_Bies I Follow @Ra_Bies After 50 cuts change in name Udta Punjab will be left with a National Anthem. documentary of gutkha Mukesh, a sanskrit shloka 'The End' 7:02 PM - 6 Jun 2016 249 166 They should release the movie Udta Punjab on Snapchat. 4:17 PM - 6 Jun 2016 Gurgaon, India, 68 89 Trendulkar @Trendulkar Udta Punjab is not am about Milkha Singh - The Flying Sikh? 7:13 PM - 6 Jun 2016 18 41 Sneha Mahale @randomcards Film on drug culture. Censor. Film on homosexuality. Censor. Film on'Kashmir. Censor. No wonder we get Housefull sequels #UdtaPunjabCensored 2016 165 138 w. "r N. s; UMBAI a seams DIST. GappistanRad? (K NW1: 2330 J) I K. 3475*}? Remove Punjab from Udta bah I to know which state is shown 1 . . 4:56 PM 6 Jun 2016 67 62 Q3 Udta Punjab makers asked to make 89 cuts, Twitterati jokes to release it on Snapchat The Indian Express 67 LL Recommended .11. .I m) 4.1? . Kajoi's Secret Method Sneak peek at Miss India The Best New Cor Hot Celebrities Kolkata 2016 bikini shoot Listings in New Y: and Miami Beach of-kajols-younger-charming- Do- india/photos/sneak-peek-at? 06eb-42ae-8800- miss-india-kolkata-2016- mod=mansiongl_ f5e251f46893&adid=1) bikini- shoot/eventshow/50529877.cms? Recommended by WHAT Is YOUR - 0% 22% 53% I . A 1? Rishi Kapoor Tweets Don?tjust invest. Invest Deepika Padukone's Million Dollar Luxury Picture Of Himself With wisely Secret Method Homes You Have to See A Barely Recogmsable ABM MyUniverse? Hot Celebrities to Believe Huf?ngton Post India Mansion Global by Dow Jones Recommended by I 67m Udta Punjab What can a rock star, a migrant labourer, a doctor and a cop possibly have in common, you would think. If you were in the Punjab of today, the one of rampant drug smuggling and abuse, the one that?s ?ying all the time, the answer would probably be drugs. 10 just a few years back, Tommy was the most famous Punjabi rock star, selling a million CDs from Ludhiana to London. But his drug addiction has taken over since then and it has been a while since Tommy came up with anything Desperate and on the verge of creative bankruptcy, Tommy needs to rediscover his creativity. Meanwhile, Mary lane, a one-time hockey player in Bihar is forced to work the ?elds in Punjab after her father's death. But she is still a young girl, and she still has dreams. So when a packet comes ?ying across the border one fated night and lands at her feet, it's only natural that Mary lane is tempted. But she has no idea of the dangers that this entails. Sartaj Singh, a narcotics department cop, has made peace with the corruption all around. But all of it changes whendrugs hit a note close home. It leads him to self- realization and to the doors of Preet Sahni, a full-time doctor and a part-time GO activist ?ghting the rising drug menace in the state. Preet and Sartaj form an unlikely team and together they set out on a journey to expose the dangerous narco-political nexus in the state. Udta Punjab is about these four characters ?ghting the menace of drugs in their own little way. it's about the arti?cial highs and the real lows that they face while treading the paths fraught with mortal dangers. But above all, it's about the famed Punjabi spirit, that despitebeing fully down, has the capable of looking you in the and saying - Drugs di ma di! 66 07/06/2016 ED summons Punjab Minister in drug case - The Hindu THE DU Published: December 21. 2014 1655218T I Updated: December 22, 2014 01:11 IST CHAN DIGARH. December 21. 2014 'ab Minister in Rs.6 drug case no a; i Bikram Singh Majithia 'l he A?iiu/pin in the rocket ciuimcd that Bit-ram Sing/z Majithia had assisted him in procuring chemicals The Enforcement Directorate has summoned Punjab Revenue Minister Bikram Singh Majithia in a Rs. intemational drug case a development which could have a bearing on relations between the BJP and its ally, the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD). Mr. Majithia is the president of the SAD Youth Wing and younger brother of Union Minister Harsimrat Kaur Badal, wife of Punjab Deputy Chief Minister Sukhbir Badal. Mr. Majithia con?rmed that he had received the summons on the phone on December 19-20 and had been asked to appear before the ED at its Jalandha of?ce. Sources said the Enforcement Directorate had prepared some 50 questions for Mr. Majithia. The lid was blown off the racket by the Punjab Police when on January 5 m?th the arrest ot'a Canadian national of Indian origin, Devinder Singh. His questioning revealed that precursor chemicals ketamine, ephedrine and pseudo-ephedrine were being diverted from the medical sector and procured by those running the racket from Delhi, Mumbai and Hyderabad. These were then smuggled to Canada, where these chemicals were being processed into drugs by Chinese and Vietnamese nationals. Superintendent of Police and international wrestler, said the youth Akalileader and Damanvir Singh, son of the then Punjab Jail Minister, Swaran Sinngh Philiaur. had assisted him in procuring chemicals and precursors from owners of pharmaceutical units in Himachal Pradesh and Punjab. The issue then gained political overtones; the Opposition Congress used it to attack the Badals, and the BJP was forced to distance itself from the Akalis. The Badals maintained that the guilty would not be spared. Badal's defence However, last month when reports appeared -, pr- ?in Mr. Majithia, ChiefMinister Parkash Singh Badal had come . it, 1/2 N. 5? Gs 07/06/201 6 ED summons Punjab Minister in Rs.6.000-crore drug case - The Hindu out in his defence, and stated that as there was no substantial evidence against him, there was no need for Mr. Majithia to resign. He said a Minister could not be sacked because of newspaper reports and allegations by Opposition parties. This rule had been given the go-by earlier this the same case. year when Mr. Phillaur had to resign as Minister after his son, Damanvir Singh. was quizzed in Printable versEL.? Jun 7. 2016 11:00:35 PM niinister-majith ia-in-rs-60oo-crore-syniheti The Hindu . 2/2 Eart? Kan. Qq 0710612016 Punjab's harvest of intoxicants - The Hindu THE HINDU 1N1 Em Published: April 29, 2014 00:09 IST Updated: April 29, 2014 00:09 IST April 29. 2014 Punjab?s harvest of intoxicants - Qua nderSuta In ufler constituency, angry people are asking candidates how they plan. to tackle the drug problem that threatens an entire generation There is an air of expectancy in Hareri village in Sangrur Lok Sabha constituency. Kala, an opium addict, explains why. ?Every election, a truckload of liquor and opium as much as we want is usually distributed. It will certainly happen this time too." At Mandali Chandbaja in Far-idkot district, Hal-tinder Singh and a group ofvillagers are waiting to sell their newly harvested wheat at the roadside mandi. ?There is demand from our area to legalise sale of opinrn so that young people who are addicted to more dangerous drugs like heroin and smack can use the less harmful and cheaper opiate," he says. A few kilometres away in Deepsinghwala village, people waved black {lags at the Shiromani Akali Dal MP, Paramjit Kaur Gulshan, when she went to seek votes. "About 40 per cent of the village youth are hooked to drugs. The ruling politicians are hand in glove with the drug ma?a,? says Nachattar Singh, a farmer. Ms Gulshan created a stir by declaring that if elected, she would push for establishing legal opium vends in her area. The problem of the youth Even a casual observer of the election scene in Punjab will not fail to notice that drugs, have emerged as the dominant narrative in the ongoing election campaign. The Narendra Modi wave, visible in other parts of the country, is barely discernible here. In constituency after constituency, candidates of the ruling Akali Dal?Bharatiya Janata Party combine as well as the Congress are faced with questions from angry people about what measures will be taken to arrest the problem that threatens the State's youth. When Rahnl Gandhi, quoting from a snvey, said in 2012 that 70 per cent of Prinjab?s youth are addicted to drugs, the ruling combine reacted with fury. Today its candidates across the State are facing uncomfortable questions over the perceived involvement of the political machinery in the distribution of drugs. Bhagwant Mann, popular Punjabi satirist and Aam Adrni Party (AAP) candidate from Sangrur, has based his entire election campaign on drugs. A band youth organise street plays that Show drugs being transported in the ruling party leaders' of?cial vehicles. Indeed, one reason for the unexpected surge in SUpport of the in Punjab in this election is being attributed to the widespread perception that leaders of the. Akali Dal, the BJP and the. Congress all have a hand in the drug racket. ?Though the ruling alliance is facing more anger and the code word for smack in particular is the name of an Akali leader, the Congress also has its share of drug lords," says Darshan Singh in Chandbaja. In the 2012 Assembly elections, the Akali alliance promised to eradicate the drug problem. Barely two years later, a drug lord who was arrested rranted Cabinet minister Bikram Singh Majithia, the brother?in-law of Deputy Chief Minister Sukhbir Badal, as the kingpin 0f the ?ourishing drug racket. That the Punjab police h. . Wire-vi r, ?_.Vsensati0nal allegations has only strengthened public perception that ruling politicians are involved. In October last ye 'l ?officer-turned?crusader against drugs, Shashi Kant Shanna, had on the directions of the Punjab and Harya'na Hi it . abs-ha 1; ?fth". lcantslartic?l?a'nge? =prinl 1/2 n. 5- . i a. THANE D?s a. at: 07/06/2016 Punjab?s harvest of intoxicants - The Hinou elections. As against the 322 kilograms of heroin recovered from the Punjab border last yea r. more than 250 kilograms have been seized in the ?rst four months of this year, pro 'npting the Ministry of Home Affairs (M HA) and the EC to take note of the problem. A few days back, the MHA initiated an internal probe to ?nd out if funds generated from drug smuggling are being used to fund elections in the State. Amid the electoral din where Punjab politicians are trading charges over drug smuggling, few are talking about why the problem exists in Punjab and not in neighbouring Rajasthan or Jammu and Kashmir. The problem is not just of smuggled heroin from Afghanistan and Pakistan. drugs are manufactured in Punjab and its neighbouring States and are sold in thousands of chemist shops in rural areas. Mr Shanna believes that as terrorism ebhed in the early nineties in Punjab, the narco-terrorism network made inroads into sections of the politico?bureaucratic set-up, which is used to lavish lifestyles -- a lay-product of insurgency. ?The new narco-political elite uses drug money to fund elections now," he says. Hareri villagers told The Hindu that the strategy used for the sale of drugs is very similar to multi-level marketing. An addict who gets more people to join the network is rewarded with free daily ?xes. Economic and social decline For some years now, sociologists have been raising alarms about the sharp economic and social decline of Punjab. The diminishing returns from the Green Revolution have coincided with the poor quality of educational infrastructure and unemployment. Says Professor Harish Puri, academic and Punjab watcher: ?In tillage after village, you will ?nd young boys doing nothing. Their education is so poor that it cannot get them jol?s. The youth are assailed by a growing sense that they are good for nothing." Over the counter. amphetamines that are easily available in village chemist shops. protected in many places by the village sarpanches, offer an easy high. A rise in real estate prices has put more money in the hands of young boys and girls from landed families who spend on drugs, fancy cars and a hedonistic lifestyle. Consequently. rural suicides, a galloping divorce rate and increasing crime rates are the totem poles of life in modern-day Punjab. From the manner in which politicians are scurrying for cover from the growing anger of the people in this election over the drug problem, it is clear that the traditionally aggressive Punjabi, who is not known to take things lying down, seems to have had. enough. What is worrying sane elements though is whether this anger will be manifested only at the hustings or whether it could be worse. ?During [the] terrorism [period]. we did a study which found that 80 per cent of the boys who had become terrorists were unernployable and found a sense of self-worth in the gun," Dr Puri points out. can see the same hopelessness among Punjab's youth today.? chanderdogra@thehindu.co.in Printable version Jun 7, 2016 11:03:00 PM (if! The Hindu EM a 07/062016 ?Seven out of 10 youths in Pury?ab take to drugs" - Ti .3 Hindu Published: October 12, 2012 02:33 ISTI Updated: October 12, 2012 02:35 IST Chandigarh. October 12, 2012 NATIONAL ?Seven out of 10 youths in Punjab take to drugs? Rahal Gandhi on Thursday claimed that seven out of ten youths in Punjab have a drug problem, triggering a controversy with the ruling Akali Dal asking how the Congress leader came to this ?mathematical conclusion" on drug addiction in the State. The AICC general secretary was addressing, a rally organised by the National Students Union of India (NSUI) 0n the Panjab University campus here. Making a mention of Punjab, Mr. Gandhi said, ?What is happeningto human resource in Punjab? Seven out often youths have the problem of drugs.? Reacting. Shiromani Akali Dal Naresh Gujral said, am not a mathematician like. Mr. Rahul Gandhi, who, after a ?ying visit to Punjab, has discovered that wen out often children in Punjab are addicted to drugs." Mr. anral, however, agreed that it was a major problem and that the Centre's attention had been drawn to it. He alleged that Pakistan had been pushing drugs into Punjab and it was like a proxy war. Deputy Chief Minister Sukhbir Singh Badal said the Punjab government had no control over the flow of drugs into the State from Pakistan and that the problem was a national one. Mr. Badal said it was the duty of the BSF which comes under the Central government to check the ?ow of drugs into the State. This article is closed for comments. Printable version Jun 7. 2016 11:06:57 PM dmgs/article3988758.ece The llindu drugs/arti Please -punjab-take?to? 1/1 i 07/06/2016 Punjab ?ghting a war on drug menace: Banal - The Hindu at Lr; NATIONAL Published: July 4, 2015 00:00 IST Updated: July 4, 2015 05:50 IST Amritsar, uly 4, 2015 Punj ab ?ghting a war on drug menace: Badal 'nia?'uq 1 534? ti, . in Punjab Chief Minister arkash Singh Badal during a Sangat Darshan programme near Amritsar on Friday:- Photo: Punjab Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal said the State was ?ghting a war on drug menace and his government has taken a number of bold decisions to stamp out this curse. "We have opened several drug tie-addiction centres to provide the best suitable treatment to the drug addicts for their detoxi?cation." he said. A network of rehabilitation centres have also been set up in the State for the rehabilitation of drug addicts to enable them to lead a happy life with self- respect. the chief minister said He lamented that the narcotics like heroine was smuggled into Punjab from Afghanistan via Pakistan. ?On the Law and Order front. our government had taken a tough posture against the drug traf?ckers who were indulging in the illegal smuggling of drugs across the state by taking stern actions against these offenders," Mr. Badal said. Justifying the issue of transferring Sikh prisoners from other States to Punjab, the Chief Minister categorically said that our government has not committed anything wrong as we have not released rather only shifted them to State jails that too within the ambit of law of the land. On the contrary the Rashtriva Sikh Sangat, an out?t of RSS has even approached the Union Home Ministry to release all the Sikh prisoners lodged in different jails ofthe country on humanitarian grounds, he said. Mr. Badal ridiculed Congress deputyr leader in Lok Sabha Amarinder Singh for ?playing to the galiery rather seriously focusing? on his "much hyped mass contact programme? to reclaim his party?s base and credibilin ?Congress base has been shoddin eroded due to people?s un?inching faith and con?dence in the policies and programmes of the SAD-BJP alliance in the State.? he said. On the sidelines on the ?rst day of his Sangat Darshan programme in the Jandiala Guru Assembly Segment, the Chief Minister said that the real "Mass Contact? programme to establish cordial relations with the general public was his time-tested Sangat Darshan programme which was primarily aimed at resolving the issues of common man on the spot besides instilling a sense of con?dence in the functioning of the State administration. - PTI Printable version Jun 7, 2016 11:07:47 PM I The Hindu 1/1 rm". .. 07/06/2016 Concern over growing drug abuse among women in Punjab - The Hindu ML Published: February4, 2015 00:00 IST Updated: February 4, 2015 14:40 IST CHAN DIGARH. February 4, 2015 Concern over growing drug abuse among women in Punjab - Sperm Former Punjab Finance minister Manpreet Singh Badal, who now heads the People's Party of Punjab, on Tuesday expressed deep concern over reports about increasing numbers of girls and women getting addicted to drugs, which only exposed the dark underbelly of what was once the most prosperous State in the country and was considered to be a role model. Stark reality "The issue is not that Punjabis are being portrayed as drug addicts as being made out by the ruling Akali Dal leadership but it is a stark reality staring in the face of the Punjabis. One can imagine the situation when even the women in the family become addicts. The repercussions can be far reaching and too serious for a frontline State like Punjab,? Mr. Badal said reiterating his earlier proposal of evolving a consensus to confront the menace of drugs which had assumed alarming proportions. Holistic policy Mr. Badal, who is the estranged nephew of Chief Minister Parkash Singh Badal, said despite the fact that the issue of drugs had come to dominate the political discourse, the State government was still to come out with any holistic policy to deal with such the situation. Noting that the government gave the impression of launching a campaign against drugs but that was con?ned to rounding up some addicts only, he also argued that merely blaming Pakistan for smuggling amounted to shifting of blame as drugs were more prevalent. Printable version Jun 7, 2016 11:08:27 PM The Hindu 1/1 or, Em a, 07I06IZU16 Drugs a key issue in Punjab polls - The Hindu HIND Published: April 13. 2014 02:50 IST Updated: April 13, 2014 02:50 IST Chandigarh, April 13, 2014 Drugs a key issue in Punjab polls - Se [abiit Pa ndlier Widespread addiction to drugs and alcohol as well blatant use of such intoxicants to lure voters has become one of the issues that is not only being debated but has provided enough material for political leaders to pin down their opponents in the ongoing campaign for the 16th Lok Sabha elections. While the unearthing of two major networks for traf?cking heroin and drugs, operated through an international web had hit headlines last year. the secretariat of Punjab?s Chief Electoral Of?cer said that the authorities had made major seizures of a wide variety of intoxicants ever since the model code of conduct was enforced. The market value ot'the seized items is estimated around Rs. 600 crore. They include 130 quintals of poppy husk known as bhukki in local parlance, 135 of heroin, 65 kg of opium. 1.6 kg of smack, 27 of "dry powder," nearly one lakh capsules and 1.63 lakh tablets of intoxicants, 1.28 lakh litres of illicit liquor, 43,737 bottles of country liquor and 24 quintals of 'lahan' (molasses) used to make illicit liquor. The Congress and Aam Admi Party have gone on the offensive on the issue, accusing the Altali government of not only turning a blind to the problem but patronising the traf?cking of intoxicants that jeopardised an entire generation in the State. The chief, Anind Kejriwal, during the ongoing road shows in support of his party candidates, pointed out that the name of the State?s Revenue minister, Bikram Singh Majithia had ?gured in the drugs case busted by the Patiala district police. He charged that the dirty money was being used to subvert democracy especially the elections. Ever since he entered the fray at Amritsar, former Chief Minister, Amarinder Singh has been raised the issue at almost every public rally or a press conference. He has charged the entire clan of Chief Minister, Parkash Singh Badal as well as their minister relative, Mr Majithia of patronising drug traf?cking. understand your greed for robbing the State by grabbing the. mining, liquor, transport or cable trade but at least spa re our youth and don't indulge in the drug trade and traf?cking,? Capt Singh addressed the ruling fa mily through one of his statements. Capt Singh has also refused to accept the ploy adopted by the Chief Minister to shift the blame to the failure of the central agencies, especially the Border Secv'r?ty t-orce (BSF) to prevent international smuggling. He pointed out that the name of Mr Badal's relative had ?gured in a racket where drugs were manufactured in pharmaceutical facilities in the State and neighbouring areas. He pointed out that many of those arrested could be linked to other Akali leaders as well. The AAP candidate from Sangrur. Bhagwant Mann, who is a comedian and satirist, highlights the issue at his public meetings. One of the videos of his such meeting that went viral onlii 1e shows an old lady requesting audience with the Chief Minister, as her son had turned an addict after he received the free liquor during the campaigns for a previous elections. A Ludhiana based organisation, ?Belan Brigade? that has the rolling pin used in the kitchen as it symbol. has taken upon itself to ?ght the problem. Led by the founder. Anita Shanna, who is an architect by profession, the brigade's activists have been spreading information as well as trying to motivate women to stand up and oppose use of drugs and other intoxicants to lure their men folk for electoral gains. This article is closed for comments. Please Printable version Jun 7. 2016 11:08:56 PM polls/article5906391.ece The Hindu bu, 'h .. 1ft Km} 07/06/2016 A lost generation - The Hindu 3: :45 ?1 9H I) Published.- April 20, 2013 16:13 151? Updated: April 22, 2013 15553 181? April 20, 2013 FOOT A lost generation 1 4 Hit]: prey to drugs. ummen and children bear the brunt oj'licing in (irrit- ofcr'imc and viideni'ejiielled by addiction. She is barely 20: thin, pale, her eyes glazed and vacant with the habit accumulated through her short life, of suffering without hope or end. Her father succumbed to drugs when she was a small child. Her mother was forced to marry her husband?s younger brother. He too fell to drugs, and died a few yea rs later. Her brother, just years older to her, emulated his father before he even became a teenager. Her mother married her off at 17. hoping she would build some kind of life for herself in her new home. But the girl soon discovered that her husband also used hard drugs. Like several hundred wives, daughters, mothers and sisters in the working class settlement Maqboolpura in Amritsar, her life-sentence is of hard labour. She cleans dishes in peonle's homes, desperately trying to keep her family alive. When in 1999, Tribune reporter Varinder found that 30 women were widowed in this neighbourhood in three years, he named it ?widows' colony'. The name has stuck, and local social workers today have recorded 33o widows, all to the assault of intoxicants and drugs that have penetrated the soul of proud Punjab. The government pays some of them a pension of as little as Rs. 250. In an af?davit to the High Court, the Punjab government itself admitted that in two-thirds of rural Punjabi households, at least one male is addicted to drugs. The administration is reluctantly awakening to this deadly social epidemic. An estimated 5000 men undergo treatment in 51 centres across the state, too small for the scale of the crisis. But a much larger number fall prey to illegal centres with untrained staff, where they are chained and beaten. Elders across Punjab today mourn the loss of an entire generation. Punjab is reportedly the transit route for international drugs to Indian cities, and overseas. But it quickly became also a destination, as young people in Punjab learnt both to use and traf?c drugs. A recent UN report estimates that Punjab has the second highest numbers of drug addicts in the country. They abuse charas, country liquor, smack, heroin, painkillers, amphetamines, opium and even lizards? tails. Those who fall prey to drugs are mostly men in their prime, stricken when they should be working and raising families. Instead they are recklessly sharing injections, swallowing sometimes a 100 pills a day, peddling their blood, stealing, falling into debt, forcing their wives and mothers to part with money earned to ?ll their children?s stomachs, selling even their homes. Children grow hungry and frightened, watching violent and irresponsible fathers wasting away. But sadly boys also learn to imitate their fathers. Sociologist Amanpreet Singh found that a third of the addicts said they learnt drugs by imitating their fathers, and nearly a ?fth their siblings. The daily tragedy of this lost generation plays out in almost every home in Maqboolpura in Amritsar. not far from the Golden Temple. Its predominantly Muslim population emptied out during Partition, and was replaced by poor working class Sikhs and Hindu refugees from across the border. Women mainly work as domestic help; men when they can mostly put! rickshaws or drive auto-rickshaws. But, as they slip into the world of drugs, manual work becomes impossible; women and children often survive by brewing and selling illicit country liquor and then graduate to even more deadly drugs. It is not uncommon to see small children adeplly negotiating with drunken customers. Many drop out early from school to help their mothers bring home money to feed the family. The predicament of these small children moved a local teacher Ajit Singh, popularly known as Masteiji, to create a safe haven for them to study and stay 'clean? of drugs in the years that they grew. His wake-up call was when, a decade back, his young son then around 10 asked his father for money to buy a 'gillasr?, a glass of country liquor sold openly in every street corner of Maqboolpura. Masterji desperately wanted to protect his 5011. But he thought of all children in his son?s age being raised in Maqboolpura. His wife Amandeep and he, both government schoolteachers of modest means, agonised for a while. They then decided to move all their belongings into a single room of their small house, and convert all the other rooms into classrooms. They taught the children after school hours, when they returned from their government day jobs. More than the academic engagement. children found. welcome escape for many hours into an environment free from drugs and violence. As the years passed, donations and awards came in and the teacher couple was able to build more classrooms. Today they teach and take care of more than 400 children and have the money to employ teachers as well. all young survivors from drug-abusing families. They are proud that most children who sit in their benches never fall to drugs. They organised many of their student volunteers into an an young people about the dangers of drugs, how it?traps no I 1' unemployment and crime. 1/2 4 07/06/2016 A lost generation - The Hindu I met some of these young people. They spoke of growing crime in their neighbourhood, of desperate drug-users on motor?cycles who snatch their bags to buy drugs, of corrupt complicit policemen, of alcoholic fathers, brothers and uncles, of unsafe n?olent homes, of fearful deprived childhoods. But they also spoke of their dreams tojoin the police to battle against drugs, to become of?cers, doctors and teachers. In other homes, parents raise and protect their children. Here, children were drawing up plans to protect their elders. Punjab has lost one generation to militancy. and the next to drugs. Maybe a third will cure it of this sickness that has entered deep into its soul. This article is closed for comments. Please Emai?he?djlg; Printable version Jun 7, 2016 11:09:52 PM generation]a11icle4633241.ece The Hindu arsh_M 2/2 07/082016 Printed from THE TIMES OF INDIA Puiwlosing against drug addiction. says study - Times of India es 0 Punjab losing battle against drug addiction, says study TNN Feb 8, 2016, 03.23 AM (Representative image) Chandigarh: Punjab has lost the battle against drug addiction even before it has begun, a study by All India institute of Medical Sciences Delhi, has indicated. It will take more than IO years for the state government to provide even a single episode of treatment to addicts if it Drug Dependence Treatment Centre says, painting a grim picture of days ahead. :2 f?Of given opioid substitution treatment (OST) that involves medication like methadone or buprenorphine to help him wean away from drugs. The study points out that Punjab does not have OSTfor the patients as a widely available therapy on a long term basis. "There is a huge gap in the availability of treatment services. for opioid dependent individuals despite significant demand. OST is the most evidence?based treatment modality which has been endorsed by United Nations and World Health Organisation as well as the Indian Society. In Punjab, less than 10% of patients have received OST ever," says the study. The survey, commissioned by the Union ministry of social justice and empowetment in August 2015, has in fact ridiculed the 113 . 07I06I2016 Puriab losing battle against drug addiction. says study - Times of Irdia approach by the Punjab government, saying that it is only focused on rehabilitation centres. 99% of drug addicts. 54% are mrrled iv A large mala?lfy' are I and degree a! formal edtlcatlnn About 55% n?laplald - dependent peep-la belong to rural areas 85% of ap-lald dependents tried to give up. only 35% any help ?If the treatment strategies remain focused on only treatment adr?ission to a de?addiction centre, it will take about it) years to provide a single episode of treatment to the entire opioid dependent population in the state," it said. 2/3 0710612016 Pmablosing?battie against drug addiction. says study- Times of India It further says that many drug dependent individuals are trying to give up but not many are receiving help from the government. "Our survey indicates that while as many as 80% of opioid dependent individuals have tried to give up, only about 35% have received any help," it says. 4 3/3 79 Punjab sinking in Pak drugs worth Rs 7.500 crore per year: - Times of India Printed from THE TIMES OF INDIA Punjab sinking in Pak drugs worth Rs 7,500 crore per year: AIIMS TNN {Jan E5, 2016, 04.40 AM 19 g: BEPENBEHTS .IHTPUMJAB Punjab sinking in Pak drugs worth Rs 7,500 crore per year: AIIMS HANDIGARH: At a time when the nexus between terrorists and drug smugglers in Pakistan has come under a harsh spotlight after the Pathankot airbase attack, a new studv by AIIMS has found that opioids worth Rs 7,500 crore are consumed in Punjab e_very year. Ofthese, heroin's share is a massive Rs 6,500 crore. This is a startling revelation given that almost all Punjab is through the Pakistan border, pumped i P- aided by 18!. It is this smuggler network that th- fristsd?qy?za?f?ack? . . the Pathankot airbase are believed to have user._ 0?5 Security agencies have so far insisted that Pakistani heroin is not consumed in Punjab; it merely passes through to bigger cities like Delhi. But this study a ?rst of its kind survey by the National Drug Dependence Treatment Centre at AIIMS - busts the myth. It says that in a population of around 2.77 crore people, there are more than 1.23 lakh heroin?dependent people. 1/4 irtMlo-wAau-msi 07/060016 Pin'ab sinking in Pak drugs wOrth Rs 7.500 crore per year: AIIMS - Times of india <3 says Opioid: worth H: 7.500% consumed every year addicts in rural areas, labourers/ business- transport 18~35 21%ofthem unskilled men workers years old farmers workers COMMQN 53% Hardin (almost all from Pak) we Raw Opium &variants Source: TNN in Punjab. The study has found that 0.84% (aroUnd 2.3 lakh) of the entire state's population is opioid deg account both opium derivatives as well as arti?cial substances that have the same effect as opiate 3' {a READ ALSO: Haryana not far behind Punjab in drug addiction. say experts '2 i . - 5? Previous studies conducted in select districts of Punjab had shown widespread use of or?) aeeti?cal opigj?_ drugs. -. {iv The survey reveals that opioid-dependent people are spending approximately Rs 20 crore daily on these drugs. On an average a heroin-dependent individual spends about Rs 1,400 per day. The study 'Punjab opioid dependence survey: Estimation of the size of opioid dependent population in Punjab' was presented to Punjab health minister Surjit Kumar Jyani on January 6. "l have my doubts about the ?gure of Rs 20 crore per day. At the same time, the government is seeing this as a warning sign. We 2/4 . . Wt. mwsm?mwm..smus.mwm 07l0612016 - ij?ab sinking in Pak drugs worth Rs 7,500 crore per year: Times of India will aim for a drug-free state," he said. While around 2.3 lakh people are opioid-dependent in Punjab, around 8.6 lakhs are estimated to be opioid users. Heroin- dependents are the highest at 1.23.414. For the survey, collaborated with Delhi based non?pro?t organisation Society for Promotion of Youth and Masses. READ ALSO: 80% of Punjab's youths addicted to drugs. says Baba Ramdev The study was conducted between Februaiy and April 2015. Data was collected from 3,620 opioid dependents from 10 districts. Among the men aged between 18 and 35 years, four in 100 are opioid dependent, while 15 in 100 could be opioid users. "We must also note that this survey estimates a much higher number of injecting drug users in Punjab (around 75,000) as compared to the existing estimate (under 20,000). Thus there is a clear threat of explosive epidemic of HIV among injecting drug users in Punjab," said the lead investigator and the principal author of the survey, Dr Atul Ambekar. In this survey, interviews were conducted mostly at the drug-dependence treatment and rehabilitation centres at the government civil hospitals of Punjab. Each respondent interviewed was asked to send three more people and who were also opioid dependent. The respondents thus came voluntarily to participate in the survey 7 government hospitals. ma; - READ ALSO: Chandigarh hits new low as drug trade goes on a high indicated that pharmaceutical injectables were the drugs of choice. The current study shows that heroin is commonest. "Our data shows that 80% of opioid dependent people in Punjab have tried to quit taking drugs but only 35% have received help. This may indicate either inadequate availability of services or reluctance low?acceptance among the people to access ab?sinking?in?Pak-drugs-worth- 3?4 ?:va . ava?able services," added Ambekar. Puriab sinking in Pak drugs worth Rs 7.500 crore per year: AIIMS - ?mes of India Read this in Malayalam crore-per~year-AIIM :44" k: 414 ?aw-J m- w? .. Cor" p-W Drug deders have destroyed Puriab youth, says CJI Dattu- Times of India 07/092016 Printed from THE TIMES OF INDIA Drug dealers have destroyed Punjab youth, says CJ I Dattu mm 1 Nov 24. 2015, 03.03 AM isT EW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday took a serious view of the menace of drug abuse in Punjab and said henceforth, every appeal against conviction under Narcotic Drugs and Substances Act would be scrutinized for possible enhancement of punishment to the guilty. Declaring that drug peddlers and drug dealers deserved no mercy, a bench of Chief Justice Dattu and Justice Amitava Roy said, ?These persons have spoiled an entire generation in rural Punjab." Thief Justice uj'lndia I. Dattu. scam goal?? "Eh tile o< ,u ngh, was {45/ Appearing for an NDPS convict Mohinder Pal, pleaded that his client was merely the driver of a private passenger bus from which the conductor, With three kilograms of 'charas', a prohibited substance, in 2002. The trial court had convicted both Mohinder and Ravinder and sentenced them to 10 years imprisonment with a ?ne of Rs 1 lakh each. Ravinder did not appeal against his conviction. The SC's dismissal of Mohinder's appeal means he will now be taken into custody to serve out the remaining nine years of hisjail term. When Malhotra said his client was not the main accused and deserved leniency, the said, "People like you have spoiled ?2 0770612016 Drug dealers have destroyed Punjab youth, says CJI Dattu- Times of India Punjab. Literally, drug peddlers and dealers have destroyed the youth of Punjab. This kind of cases should attract stringent punishment. These persons deserve no leniency." READ ALSO: Haryana not far behind Punjab in drug addiction, say experts Judiciaryjoining the ?ght against drug menace by promising stringent punishment against drug dealers and peddlers will help the establishment and the NGOs engaged in countering the spread of drug abuse in rural areas, especially those bordering Pakistan. Even the Punjab government has admitted that "a problem that is threatening the future of generation next in rural Punjab is drug and substance abuse?. The central government had said a narcotic war had been unleashed from across the border. According to NGO website alcoholrehabcom, "the extent of drug addiction in Punjab is alarming. Near border areas, the rate of heroin abuse among 15- to 25~year?olds is as high as 75% - the percentage is 7 in other rural areas throughout the region. A department of social security development of women and children suggested that as many as 67% of rural households in Punjab will have at least one drug addict in the family. There is at least one death due to drug overdose each week in the region." READ ALSO: 80% of Punjab's youths addicted to drugs. says Baba Ramdev Seizure of drugs in Punjab included heroin, opium, poppy husk and drugs Punjab P?/sons till July 2014 as against arrest of 16,821 persons in 2013 under NDPS Act. The conviction rate um I ainst accused by Punjab Police rose from 70.8% in 2010 to 80.5% in 2013. deal L- DanLMarticleshowprinU4989981?l .cms?null gs" l? 07/062016 Another report says 73.5% Punjab youth drug addicts Times of India - Printed from THE TIMES OF INDIA - Another report says 73.5% Punjab youth drug addicts TNN I Oct 14,2912, 12.43 AM HANDIGARH: Although the SAD-BJP combine is tearing its own government report on drugs, which was quoted by Rahul Gandhi while saying 7 out of 10 youngsters are drug addicts in Punjab, another document of the state government, included as part of 'state disaster management plan?, has emerged wherein the government acknowledged that "some 73.5% of the state's youth between 16 and 35 years are con?rmed drug addicts". The state disaster management plan for 2010-11 cites "drug addiction" under the "hazard" category and describes the menace as "grievous". Both revenue and disaster management departmeg nder cabinet virioiherrepurrsm's Punfubyouth (1mg addi'cli' minister Bikramjit Singh Majithia. (I I Whigs}? which was quoted by Rahul Gandhi. "Punjab's grievous drug problem was revealed recen University in Punjab?s largest city, Amritsar, which declared that some 73.5% of the state 03%?%n con?rmed drug addicts," says the disaster management plan. H: 12$? {9 The plan also quotes Raj Pal Meena, the then head of the state's Anti-Narcotics Task Force (ANTF Punjab is teetering on the edge of an extraordinary human crisis, with an inordinately large number of youngsters hooked on to marijuana, opium and heroin, in addition to imbibing a range of prescriptive tablets." http:/Itimeso? 1?2 07/06l2016 Another report says 73.5% Punjab youth drug addicts - Times of India 7 Vijay lnder Single, member of Parliament, said, "The SAD-BJP government has been using these statistics as benchmark to a/ make arrangements to tackle the drug problem. These are of?cial ?gures and deputy chief minister Sukhbir Badal must apologise to the people ofthe state for misleading them". A secretary of the department has been quoted in the disaster management plan: "Addicts used a variety of drugs which included raw opium, smack, heroin, drugs like morphine, pethidine, codeine and substances like diazepam." Vikram Chowdhary, state president of Youth Congress, has blamed the political leadership in the state for "patronizing drug lords". "The biggest recoveries of drugs are from Jalalabad and Faridkot areas which are Badal's strongholds," he said. 212 ll h" 9' BSF constable held for aiding Puriab drug smugglers - Times of Intia Printed from THE TIMES OF INDIA BSF constable held for aiding Punjab drug smugglers Jan 9, 2016, 06.58 AM '2 3' ohali: The local police on Friday arrested a Border Security I A. i 7 Force (BSF) constable from Rajasthan for allegedly helping three Punjab-based drug smugglers bring weapons and narcotics from Pakistan. Police claimed thejawan identi?ed as Anil Kumar was stationed at the 52 battalion in Ganganagar. He was caught following the interrogation of Gurjant Singh, one of the three accused. A large sum of'money was recovered from his wife. Police said the constable used to contact the accused through social networking site Facebook and messaging service WhatsApp. He used to charge Rs 40,000 to Rs 50,000 for a single delivery, said sources. The three drug smugglers were arrested with a Pakistani SIM card, weapogu 11ng cellphones recently. Police probe further revealed that Gurjant had made over 250 calls to Pakistani conspirgss tiyaaz in Lahore. Gurjant made all the ire-"AK calls from his l' a 'll . . - native ave ly VI age fair eggregular touch with Pakistan-based accused and the SH {bardt'w?ge?ai? by h; from Thailand in October last year when he met lmtiyaaz. The calls were made by Gurjant to get gs fromgai'sn'r'o {male 03 t. procured by the accused from border areas of Fazilka, Rajasthar iffdia u. 11% .7 112 07/092016 BSF constable held for aiding Punjab drug smuggers - Times of India During interrogation it was found that over 25 such consignments of drugs, mostly heroin, were received by the accused across the border. The drug was supplied to clients and dealers in Punjab and other states. The accused used to hire unemployed youths to transport the drugs. SSP Gurpreet Singh Bhullar said, "They were playing a trick by using Pakistani mobile network which is functional near the border areas. They had made over 200 calls across the border. We are trying to ?nd out their connections, clients and customers.? Sources said the police have also found the Ludhiana-based man who had provided the accused persons with fake documents to prepare passport, voter card and other identity proofs. All three accused were charged with murder, attempt to murder, kidnapping, NDPS Act, arms Act and other heinous crimes. Fe. 08/06/2016 Censor board bows 'ULPunA-likely to lose 'Punjab' - The New Indian Express \Home iojilms Jail?!" locals muffs Busmess Columns i iinokei hp?ri liuto ?LifeSiyie indulge Health Travel Tech Editorial Photos Videos Edex Wednesday,June08,2016 I A Ask Prabhu Editorial Director Magazine The SunriaySianrtard FPaper Social Stream Deni; Your tomorrow depends on the question you ask today Column: PowemldPolilicsx Home Entertainment Hindi Censor board bows to political pressure, 'Udta Punjab' likely to lose 'Punjab' By ANI Published: 06th June 2016 02:53 PM Last Updated: 07th June 2016 07:33 AM (3+1 1 Email 0 MORE FROM THIS SECTION Bombay Velvet was Titanic, Raman Raghav is boat: Kashyap First look poster of Sonakshi's _7 'Noor' out Portraylng in 'Udta Punjab? was 'blggest challenge? for Alla Actor Shahid Kapoor (File AFP) Amitabh Bachchan turns NEW What if Pun'ab is issin fro Pu 'k Udta njab? it seems II ethe Censor baddie formankhen 2, Board has eventually succumbed to the political pressure as reports suggest that they do not want the Shahid Kapoor and starrer to be set in the state. . . . . . Revealed: The secret behind i The ongomg censor issue just got political as the Censor Board doesnt want the Deepika padukone-s hot body? I movie to be set in Punjab. After Censor Board refused to issue a certi?cate to the 'Abhishek Chaubey- directed ?lm, the Revising Committee of Censor Board has now given even harsher suggestions to the makers, in order to obtain the certi?cate. Udta Punjab's story is told through music: Amit Trivedi Recommendations] Objections of the Reviewing Committee have assumed political overtones. it is being reported that the committee wants the film to be set in a fictional Ian rather than in Punjab and is demanding a lot of cuts, which are against the ?real of the movie. Strangely, the Reviewing Committee is taking a view that the flick, which is based -- on the growing drug addiction among the youth, is defamatory to Punjab. mukhs Banjo trai or to be attached to Housefull 3! Earlier also. the ruling party in Punjab, Akali Dal. had objected to the movie. Sources close to the censors indicate towards political pressure being put in the wake of Punjab elections slated to happen early next year. Co-produced by Phantom Films and Balaji Motion Pictures. 'Udta Punjab,? a highly talked about movie that is being keenly anticipated by a large section of youth, also stars Alia Bhatt Kareena Kapoor Khan and Punjabi singer-actor Diijit Dosanjh. It is slated to release on i7th June 2016. TRENDING gm 7 new: i- Raghuram Rajan chuckles on second-term debate Looking for a life partner? Register FREE on BharatMatrimony. Em L- Gulberg massacre . 2-5. Narendra Modi . .. . v, I - '?girr I 3 - it Novak Djokovic ?Udta Punjab' sans Punjab? Censor row turns political! Latest News Updates at Daily News &Analysis 9) Mathura clashes i i . 'Udta Punjab' sans Punjab? Censor row turns political! ?Udta Punjab? is supposed to hit the theatres on June 12 1 1 Sun, 5 Jun 2016-01:55pm . ANI Reportedly, in Punjab the Review film to be set in a ?ctional land rather than What if Punjab is missing from Udta Punjab? It seems like the Censor Board has eventually succumbed to the political pressure as reports suggest that they do not Want the Shahid Kapoor starrer to be set in the state. The ongoing censor issue just got political as the Censor Board doesn't want the movie to be set in Punjab. After Censor Board refused to issue a certi?cate to the Abhishek Chaubey-directed ?lm. the Revising Committee of Censor Board has now given even harsher suggestions to the makers. in order to obtain the certi?cate. ms; MUMBM in? THANE 3 a. No: 2330 .- -. f. . 08/06/2016 'Udta Punjab' sans Punjab? Censor row turns political! Latest News Updates at Daily News 8. Analysis Recommendations/Objections of the Reviewing Committee have assumed political overtones. ALSO READ 40 cuts by CBFC make 'Udta Punjab' bleed! Reportedly. the committee wants?ctional land rather than in Punjab and is demanding a lot of cuts. which are against the "reality" of the movie. Strangely. the Reviewing Committee is taking a View that the flick. which is based on the growing drug addiction among the youth. is defamatory to Punjab. Earlier also. the ruling party in Punjab. Akali Dal. had objected to the movie. Sources close to the censors indicate towards political pressure being put in the wake of Punjab elections slated to happen early next year. I ?3 5.5.33;, . .1 five ALSO READ ?03/06/2016 'Udta Punjab' sans'Punjab? Censor row turns political! Latest News Updates at Daily News &Analysis .Coqproduced by Phantom Films and Balaji Motion Pictures. Udta Punjab. a highly talked about movie that is being keenly anticipated by a large section of youth, also stars Alia Bhatt. Kareena Kapoor Khan and Punjabi singer-actor Diljit Dosanjh. The movie is slated to release on June 17, 2016. 0 Comments - Join the Discussions ALSO READ mm ENTERTAINMENT Katrina-Alia: All is well w?m ?v m-nv-vqummt?m? 6/8/201? Udta Punjab raises political storm; Cong. AAP blame Akali gov; for sensor cuts 1 punjabStop Hindustan Times .0. dx i? 3g Udta Punjab raises political storm; Cong, AAP blame Akali govt for censor cuts HT Correspondents, Hindustan Times, Chandigarh Updated: Jun 08, 2016 00:02 IST - a -h The CBF has ordered 89 cuts in the ?lm including deletion of references to Punjab not just in the title but the entire ?lm. The makers have decided to approach the high court against that. (HT Photo) Objections raised by the Central Board of Film C) over the ?lm ?Udta Punjab?, which addresses Punjab?s drug abuse problem, has raised a political storm in the state, with opposition parties gunning for the ruling Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) and its partner Bharatiya anata Party (BJP) for allegedly being behind the censor move. Also, the controversy has further given limelight to an issue that is already a vote plank in the state set to go to polls early next year. The CBFC has ordereda89 cuts in the including deletion of references to Punjab not just in the title but the entire ?lm. The makers have decided to approach the high court against that. i At the national level, Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi and Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal waded into the controversy, taking a stand against the censor board. ?Punjab has a crippling drug problem. Ceng #UdtaPunjab will not ?x it. The 3 ?2 it?s ~21. .5 i ?paarsms?, is; Menu a. my THANE oisr .- Office of RG 35 fR @Of?ceO 3. "Of: f? Punjab has a crippling drug problem Censoring #UdtaPunlab will not fix it. 1' . .- government must accept the reality and . 0 - solutions. . 2016 1,346 1,203 6/8/201?6 Udta Punjab raises political storm; Cong, AAP blame Akali govt for censor cuts punjabstopl Hindustan Times 33/ SAD secretary general and Rajya Sabha member Sukhdev Singh Dhindsa reacted by saying that this was yet another bid to ?defame? Punjabis by ?calling them drug addicts?. Punjab Cerigress president and former chief minister Captain Amarinder Singh said that cuts were ?like takigjhe soul out of the ?lm?s bedy?l n'a lik -takin - a t-amarind r- lams-c r- ikt t- n- ta? n'ab - He added, ?Instead of trying to suppress the harsh reality of drug scourge in Punjab, the Akali-BJP government should better spend its energies in solving the problem,? he added. AAP MP Bhagwant Mann alleged the censor Board was acting at the behest of SAD-BJP regime. ?It is an attack on freedom of speech and expression in highlighting the extent of drug problem in the state. By indulging in such acts, the state government cannot hide the reality of Punjab that it has pushed the state into a drug menace during its nine-year rule,? Mann added. Responding to a question on the issue, CM Parkash Singh Badal told reporters in Rupnagar on Tuesday that the state government had nothing to do with it: ?How can the state government be held responsible for it when the CBFC is exclusively under the control of the central government?? However, Dhindsa targeted Rahul Gandhi, saying that he should ?adopt an open-minded approach to get aware of the seriousness of this issue rather than playing politics on it?. Punjab BJP chief and Union minister Vijay Sampla, meanwhile, welcomed the CBF move and was quoted as saying: ?Nobodyshould be allowed to defame Why did the producers name the movie ?Udta Punjab?? Why not ?Udta Bollywood?? The drug problem is a global issue. Why is one state being "singled out?? Kashyap livid From the ?lmmakers? side, Anurag Kashyap, one of the producers of the movie, also took to Twitter to express his anguish: always, Wondered what it felt like to live in North Ab to plane pakadney ki bhi zaroorat nahin (now I don?t even need to catch a plane).? He dubbed censor board chief Pahlaj Nihalani a ?dictatorial man? while asking politicians to ?stay out of my battle?. plane pakadney ki bhizaroorat nahin.. 9:44 PM - 6 Jun 2016 If? - if, 1? 2.061 1 .590 THANE, 0931?. i n. Mm: 233.9 at. Backing the film, director Karan Job}, ,eeted, ab speaks of the reality of our reality amounts t2; ity has to stand by what 5 her right.? ?gran Inhar Udta Punjab raises political storm; Cong, AAP blame Akali govt for censor cuts punjabStopl Hindustan Times @karanjohar #UdtaPunjab speaks of the reality of our 36 reality amounts to fraternity has to stand by what's right!! 12:00 AM - 7 Jun 2016 1.761 4,133 Leading man Shahid Kapoor, who plays rockstar-addict Tommy Singh in the movie, said, ?Just because the title is ?Udta Punjab?, everyone is thinking the problem is only in Punjab. First of all, Punjab is in India and any problem in Punjab is India?s Everyone associated with the ?lm believes the issue genuinely concerns the youth and not just ?There is no ?lm more honest than UDTA And any person or party opposing it is actually GUILTY of promoting drugs,? further tweeted Kashyap. completely agree?, was AAP chief Kejriwal?s response on Twitter. But it elicited a terse response from the ?lmmaker: request Congress, AAP and other political parties to stay out of my battle. It?s my Rights vs the Censorship. I speak only on my behalf.? Polls ahead Even before the Udta Punjab controversy broke, the-Congress had made drug abuse in Punjab a key poll issue. Gandhi had in 2012 famously announced that 70% of Punjab ?3 youth were addicts, the party citing a misinterpreted study. In April this year too, the Congress vice-president had said, ?The present government in Punjab has been ignoring the drug issue. The drug problem will be solved in months if our party comes to power in the assembly elections.? - Pn" rlemin st fr nwre unhinustanim ,u - ?in--t-fa Kejriwal and Amarinder have both promised to wipe out the problem in four weeks to four months. Punjab elections are expected to be a three-cornered ?ght withthe SAD-BJP alliance ?ghting for survival, the Congress looking for a comeback win, and a con?dent AAP looking to spread its wings beyond Delhiom/puuablmn' m? . - id;- shows-unHTPunjab @HTPunjab ls drug abuse a prime proble .l lets: MUMBAI THANE DIST. 8:41 2016 . . 0 Yes 6/8/2016 Udta Punjab raises poiitical storm; Cong, AAP blame Akali govt for censor cuts i punjab$top Hindustan Times . . No C) Can't Say Vote 110 votes - 11 hours left (With inputs from New Delhi) gawk?!" raw?why 58 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION O. OF 2016 In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its ?lm ?Udta Punjab?. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. 8: 7 Versus Central Board of Film Certi?cation Anr I, Mr. Vikas Bahl, the Petitioner No. 2 abovenamed, an Indian Inhabitant, having my of?ce at Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai 400 053, on behalf of Petitioner No. 1 do hereby state on solemn af?rm as follows: 1. I say that I have perused the papers and proceedings in relation to the above matter. I am conversant with the facts of the case and capable to depose the same. 2. I say that I have ?led the above Writ Petition against the Respondents for reliefs as more particularly set out in the Petition. I repeat, reiterate and con?rm what is stated in the Petition and pray to this Hon?ble Court that the same be treated as part of this Af?davit in order to avoi re tition. 3. In the circumstances aforesaid, I respectfully pray tha made absolute with costs. A {Mr MIRA. . Solemnly af?rmed at Mumbai This day of June, 2016 Naik Naik C0 aw Partner Advocate for the Petitioners. BEFO EMEA HG N. s. BHAISARE NOTARY . GOVT 0F Inc-Q. 2016? NOT 8: REGISTER Sr. Ne" .. . Dated.. . ll?llJI Phantom Films Grandeur, 8th Fioor Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai?oad, Andheri (West). Mombai 400 053. Tel: +9l-22-4966 6000 Certi?ed true Copy of the resolution passed at the meeting of the Board of Directors of the Company held on June 07, 2016 THAT in supersession? of the-resolution passed at the Board meeting held on June 7,2016, Shri Vivek Agarwal, Authorised Signatory of the company, be and are hereby severally authorized to sign, af?rm and ?le Suits, Complaints, Veri?cation Af?davits, Af?davit of Evidence, Petition-s, and Applications and also to depose and adduEe evidence on behalf of the Company and also to compound 3 and withdraw the Complaint. 1 RESOVED FURTHER THAT the Shri-Vivek Agarwal, Authorised Signatory of the company, be and are hereby authorized severally, to sign and execute the deeds and documents aforesaid and the aforesaid P_ower(s) of Attorney wherever necessary on behalf of the company and that if so required the Common Seal of the Company be affixed thereto in accordance with the proVisions of the Articles of AssOciation of the Company. Certified to be true - For Phantom Films Private Limited - 3Q) Oswdo Shibasish Sarkar . Director va-A?N-x DIN 3450533 . (r 'i . N. St- EHAISAR *3 (I Mbmam . i. Eat; THANE it 2.330 5. .J -. ?arr. . Registered Office Grandeur, 8th Floor, Opp. Gundecha Veera Desai Road, Andheri (West). Mumbai - 400 053. CIN U22300MH20I IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION 0. OF I 2016 In the matters of: - Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the .Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its ?lm ?Udta Punjab?. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd. Anr VERSUS Fa 9~ 4.x:v? AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT Dated this June, 2016 Naik Naik Co., Advocates for the Caveator 135 136, Mittal Towers B-Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400 021. {gt?ggsaghgguyn IN THE HIGH COURT OF UDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2016 In the matters of: Articles 14, 226 and 300A of the Constitution of India, 1950; . The Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Cinematograph (Certi?cation) Rules, 1983; Ultra-vires, wrongful and arbitrary inaction on the part of the Central Board of Film Certi?cation in processing the Petitioner?s application for certi?cation of its film ?Udta Punjab?. Phantom Films Pvt. Ltd.& Anr VERSUS ?3 FL 5 ?nal . )f?India-and?ers Naik Naik Co., Advocates for the Caveator 135 136, Mittal Towers B?Wing, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400 021. ?1 yum,? mm?. wig?