Delhi HC to hear on July 30 pleas against Centre's nod to release 'Udaipur Files' film
The court was also informed that an application has been made by the producers of the film to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for re-certification of the movie, and it is likely to be considered shortly.
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela listed the pleas for hearing on Wednesday after a request for adjournment was made on behalf of one of the petitioners.
The two petitions were listed before the high court in pursuance to the Supreme Court's direction to the petitioners to approach the high court against the Centre's decision of giving nod for the film's release.
The petitions have been filed by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind president Maulana Arshad Madani and Mohd Javed, who is an accused in the Kanhaiya Lal murder case.
The apex court, on July 25, had said that film-makers' appeal against the high court order staying the film's release was infructuous for they had accepted the July 21 Centre nod for the film's release, subject to six cuts in its scenes and modifications in the disclaimer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Delhi High Court to examine if Centre has power to order cuts in Udaipur Files movie
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (July 30, 2025) asked the Centre if it had the authority to pass an order directing six cuts in the film Udaipur Files-Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder, while exercising revisional powers. 'You have to exercise the powers within the four corners of the statute. You can't go beyond that,' a Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said. The court posed the question after being informed that the Centre, while exercising its revisional powers under the Cinematograph Act, had suggested six cuts to the producers of the movie, in addition to a disclaimer. The court was also informed that the film has been recertified, but not issued to the producers, because the matter is pending in the High Court. The court was hearing a plea by Mohammed Javed, one of the accused in the Kanhaiya Lal murder case, objecting to the release of the film on the ground that it would prejudice his case during the trial. Senior advocate Maneka Guruswamy, representing Mr. Javed, submitted that six witnesses have been examined till now in the case and 160 witnesses remain. 'I was 19 years old when I was arrested. I am Accused No. 8 in the trial. I was released on bail by the Rajasthan High Court because there was no connection between me and the allegations. I am a citizen of this country and am entitled to a fair trial,' Ms. Guruswamy said. 'My right to a fair trial is jeopardised by the release of the film,' she argued. While Ms. Guruswamy concluded her arguments, the submissions of Additional Solicitor-General Chetan Sharma, who was representing the Centre and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), remained inconclusive and the court said it would continue the proceedings on August 1. Besides Mr. Javed's plea, another petition has been filed by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind president Maulana Arshad Madani. It could not be heard due to the non-availability of the counsel. Kanhaiya Lal, an Udaipur-based tailor in Rajasthan, was murdered in June 2022, allegedly by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous, for sharing a social media post in support of former BJP leader Nupur Sharma after her controversial comments on Prophet Mohammed. The trial is pending before the special NIA court in Jaipur.
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
Delhi High Court questions Centre's jurisdiction to recommend six cuts in ‘Udaipur Files'
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday asked the Union government whether it had the jurisdiction to recommend six cuts in the Hindi film Udaipur Files, which is reportedly based on the 2022 killing of Udaipur tailor Kanhaiya Lal, Live Law reported. A division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela asked the government whether revisional powers granted by Section 6 of the Cinematograph Act allow the government to pass such an order. 'You have to exercise the powers within the four corners of the statute,' the court said. 'You can't go beyond that.' The film was originally scheduled to be released on July 11. The Delhi High Court had temporarily stayed the release on July 10 and directed the Union government to examine the film's content. The Centre had recommended six cuts to the film, besides directing that it should be released with a disclaimer. On Wednesday, the court questioned whether the Centre's actions ventured into it acting as an appellate authority instead of a revisional authority, The Indian Express reported. Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, representing the Centre and the Central Board of Film Certification, informed the court that the film had passed through a two-stage filter test, PTI reported. First, the censor board recommended 55 cuts, followed by an additional six cuts suggested by the review committee, bringing the total to 61 edits, Sharma said. Kanhaiya Lal killing In June 2022, Lal, a tailor, was killed in Rajasthan's Udaipur for purportedly sharing a social media post in support of suspended Bharatiya Janata Party Spokesperson Nupur Sharma. She had made disparaging remarks about Prophet Muhammad during a television debate in May 2022. The assailants and several other persons accused in the matter were arrested by the Rajasthan Police. A video showed two men claiming responsibility for the killing of Lal as they brandished the cleavers used in the murder. The murder case was investigated by the National Investigation Agency and the persons accused in the matter were charged under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. The trial is underway in a Special NIA Court in Jaipur. The High Court had stayed the release of Udaipur Files while hearing a batch of petitions, including one filed by Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind chief Maulana Arshad Madani, seeking a ban on the film. The petitioners had alleged that the film is communally provocative and vilifies the Muslim community.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
HC seeks police's reply on plea against pubs, bars running illegally without proper liquor licence
New Delhi, The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought to know about the action taken by police against bars, pubs, clubs and restaurants allegedly operating in the city illegally and serving liquor without a proper licence. HC seeks police's reply on plea against pubs, bars running illegally without proper liquor licence A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela issued notices to the Delhi government and the city police and asked them to file their responses containing details of such bars, pubs and restaurants. "The affidavit by the respondents should also contain the details of action taken in case the bars, pubs and restaurants mentioned in the petition are found violating the provisions of law," the bench said. The court has listed the matter for further hearing on August 27. Petitioner Mahtab Khan has claimed that several restaurants, clubs, pubs and bars in the city are operating illegally, without the L-16 licence, causing loss to the government. Senior advocate Kirti Uppal and lawyer Sitab Ali Chaudhary, representing the petitioner, submitted that despite pointing out the illegality through a representation, the authorities have failed to take any action and stop these establishments from operating after the permitted time limit. The plea has pointed out that under the Delhi Excise Act and Rules, standalone bars, restaurants, clubs and pubs are prohibited from operating and selling alcohol after 1 am unless they possess the L-16 licence. Despite this, numerous establishments have been found to be serving alcohol well past the permitted hours, sometimes operating until 7 am, in blatant disregard for the law, it has alleged. "In recent weeks, the petitioner sent some persons to visit the establishments listed in the petition, all of which have been found to operate past the legally permitted time and sell alcohol without the required licences. "The list is only inclusive and not exhaustive, as mentioned in the petition, indicating 21 such bars, pubs, clubs and restaurants, that is, violators. Such places organise events and parties each night which go on till 7 am without the requisite licence and permit," the plea has claimed. It has said that these establishments are located in such areas where fire tenders cannot even reach in case of an accident as some of those do not have an appropriate approach to the road. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
