Factual Matrix 

In the case of Kuldeep Tiwari v UOI a lawsuit in the public interest was brought against the movie Adipurush. The petitioner asked that the film be immediately outlawed because it would hurt the feelings of those who adore these characters and cause societal unrest. The petitioner also asserted that she could not comprehend from where the film’s substance was taken because neither the Valmiki Ramayana nor the Tulsikrit Ramcharit Manas had any narratives of a comparable nature.

Argument Advance 

The petitioner criticised the colour images in the movie and asserted that the portrayals of Lord Rama, Devi Sita, Lord Hanuman, Ravan, and Vibhishana did not follow the Cinematograph Act of 1952’s Guidelines for Certification of Films for Public Exhibition. 

According to DSGI, scenes and conversations from a movie may be independently validated by speaking with authority. The Cinematograph Act of 1952 offers the Central Government revisional authority in Section 6. The Board of Films certification cannot review a certificate that has already been issued. Before the movie begins, a disclaimer explaining that it is not the “Ramayana” is necessary.

Analysis of Court order 

The Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI) was given 24 hours by the division bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan and Justice Shree Prakash Singh of the Allahabad High Court to obtain comprehensive instructions from the Union of India, notably the Ministry and Board of Film Certification. Additionally, the DSGI is required to advise the court that the Ministry is considering removing its authority under Section 6 of the Cinematograph Act of 1952 in the interest of the general public. At a later date, the issue will be discussed.