Mumbai: In a significant development in the ongoing dispute between Kangana Ranaut and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), the Bollywood actress and producer has agreed to implement all cuts suggested by the censor board for her latest project, “Emergency.” The CBFC disclosed this information to the Bombay High Court on Monday, during a hearing concerning the issuance of a certification for the film.
Presided over by a division bench comprising Justices BP Colabawalla and Firdosh Pooniwalla, the court heard a petition filed by Zee Entertainment Enterprises, the co-producer of “Emergency.” Zee Entertainment sought the court’s intervention to expedite the certification process for the film, directed by Ranaut, who also stars as former Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The film was initially scheduled for release on September 6, but it hit a roadblock due to the non-issuance of the certification.
Kangana Ranaut, known for her bold statements and uncompromising stance on creative freedom, had previously accused the CBFC of deliberately stalling the certification process to delay the film’s release. The high-stakes drama is centered around Indira Gandhi’s tenure during India’s Emergency period from 1975 to 1977, a highly controversial topic that has drawn significant public and political attention.
Adding fuel to the controversy are objections from various Sikh organizations, including the Shiromani Akali Dal. They argue that the film misrepresents their community and portrays historical events inaccurately. These accusations have only compounded the difficulties for Ranaut and her production company, Manikarnika Films.
During Monday’s proceedings, Advocate Sharan Jagtiani, representing Zee Entertainment, informed the court that Ranaut had communicated her acceptance of the revisions proposed by the CBFC. “The matter has been agreed upon and discussed between her and the CBFC,” Jagtiani stated. However, he also mentioned that Zee Entertainment requires additional time to verify the specific cuts to be implemented.
Countering accusations of potential delays, CBFC’s counsel, Abhinav Chandrachud, assured the court that the suggested cuts would not significantly affect the movie’s duration. Chandrachud noted, “The cuts will not alter even a single minute of the film’s runtime.
. Most of these changes have already been accepted by Manikarnika Films.”
The court, recognizing the ongoing adjustments, has postponed the matter until October 3. It has instructed both parties—Zee Entertainment and the CBFC—to return with clear and precise updates about the cuts to be made and the consequent issuance of the film’s certification.
In their plea, Zee Entertainment claimed that the CBFC had already finalized the certificate for “Emergency” but had refrained from issuing it. Alleging political interference, they argued that the certificate’s withholding was influenced by the impending elections in Haryana. This suggestion raises questions about why the ruling party would supposedly act against Ranaut, a known BJP supporter and Member of Parliament.
Ranaut, who has not shied away from political controversies in the past, has taken a firm stand against what she considers unwarranted censorship. She has publicly denounced the delay, attributing it to ulterior political motives linked to the upcoming state elections.
This legal battle is merely the latest episode in the broader discourse on artistic freedom and political accountability in India. As the film industry frequently grapples with regulatory hurdles, Ranaut’s experience underscores the enduring challenges faced by filmmakers addressing politically sensitive subjects.
The court’s decision on October 3 is highly anticipated, as it will determine the immediate future of “Emergency” and could set a precedent for how politically charged films are handled by the CBFC in the future. Meanwhile, both the film’s proponents and detractors await this pivotal judgment with bated breath.
Kangana Ranaut’s “Emergency” promises to be more than just a cinematic representation of a controversial period in Indian history. It is becoming a touchstone for discussions on freedom of speech, artistic expression, and political influence in contemporary Indian society. As the stakeholders prepare for the next court date, the film’s journey reflects the intricate dynamics between politics, art, and law in the world’s largest democracy.
