rgv-s-movie-lands-in-trouble-court-sets-aside-censor-certificate

The maverick filmmaker Ram Gopal Varma is controversy’s favourite child.

Be it the content of his movies or his comments on social media platforms, the producer-director never fails to cause ripples.

 

RGV, as the filmmaker is popularly known, has landed in a fresh controversy with his political thriller “Vyuham” (Strategy) evoking outrage in the opposition camp in Andhra Pradesh.

 

Following a petition filed by the Telugu Desam Party, the Telangana high court set aside the censor certificate issued to the movie last month and directed the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to reconsider its decision.

 

In his petition, the TDP general secretary Nara Lokesh, who is the son of the party supremo and former chief minister N Chandrababu Naidu, alleged that the film was an unvarnished propaganda venture of the ruling YSR Congress Party. It portrays Chief Minister YS Jagan Mohan Reddy as a righteous hero and the opposition Congress leaders and Chandrababu Naidu as villains.

 

Many matters which are sub judice before the court including the cases of skill development scam case were shown in the movie portraying Chandrababu Naidu in a negative role.

 

The movie focuses on the political situation that prevailed in the combined Andhra Pradesh in the aftermath of the sudden death of Chief Minister YS Rajashekar Reddy in a helicopter crash in September 2009.

 

Projecting YSR’s son Jagan as an innocent victim of the devious political ploys, the film portrays how the young MP from Kadapa overcomes the adverse situation and the obstacles created by the political rivals and emerges unscathed as a popular leader winning the hearts of the masses.

 

The TDP alleged that the movie was defamatory to the party and its leaders.

 

The Court agreed with the petitioner’s argument and ruled that the filmmakers have no unbridled right to tarnish the image and reputation of any individual or political party.  Justice Surepalli Nanda of the high court observed that reputation, an inherent component of the right to life, cannot be allowed to be crucified at the altar of others' right to free speech.

 

The court found that the Examining Committee of the CBFC had clearly indicated that the movie defamed living characters and was aimed at political unrest. However, the Revising Committee of CBFC had gone ahead and cleared the movie despite the contrary opinion of the Examining Committee.

 

The Court noted that the Revising Committee had not mentioned reasons for clearing the movie. The judge said that the expert body had “failed in its duty” in reviewing the film in its entirety.