NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday directed Doordarshan to screen within eight weeks Anand Patwardhan's Father, Son and Holy War.

"It would not be proper to deny telecast of an award-winning documentary merely on the ground that Part II is certified `A' by the censor board," said a Bench consisting of Justices A.R. Lakshmanan and Lokeshwar Singh Panta.

Doordarshan had time and again given various excuses for not screening the film. "This is highly irrational and is blatant violation of the right guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution [freedom of expression with reasonable restriction]. This behaviour would justify our stating that Doordarshan is being dictated by rules of mala fides and arbitrariness in taking decisions on the telecast of the respondent's film."

The film, which deals with male psyche and its relationship to communal violence, was completed in 1994. It was cleared by the Central Board of Film Certification, and it won two national awards in 1996 — for the best social film and the best investigative film. It also bagged several international awards. In 2004, it was included by the DOX magazine (Europe) as one of the 50 memorable international documentaries of all times.

After Doordarshan refused to telecast the film, Mr. Patwardhan filed a writ petition and the Bombay High Court directed DD to telecast the film.

Dismissing DD's appeal against the order, the Bench said: "This documentary film in our considered opinion showcases a real picture of crime and violence against women and members of various religious groups perpetrated by politically motivated leaders for political, social and personal gains."

Writing the judgment for the Bench, Mr. Justice Lakshmanan said: "This film does not violate any constitutional provision, nor will it create any law and order problem as Doordarshan fears. It is seeking to portray certain evils prevalent in our society and is not seeking to cater to the prurient interests of any person. We have no hesitation in saying that this documentary film if judged in its entirety has a theme and message to convey and the view taken by the appellants that the film is not suitable for telecast is erroneous."

DD being a state-controlled, public funded agency could not have denied access to screen the documentary except on specified valid grounds.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail