MANOHAR LAL SHARMA versus SANJAY LEELA BHANSALI & ORS.

MANOHAR LAL SHARMA versus SANJAY LEELA BHANSALI & ORS.

Since the film's certification is pending with CBFC, the Court cannot pre-judge or intervene; prayer for direction to CBI lacks any legal foundation as no offence is made out and police has no role for alleged IPC sections; the petition and its pleadings are scurrilous, vexatious and abuse of PIL process, merit dismissal.

Parties
Petitioner: Manohar Lal Sharma; Respondent No. 1: Sanjay Leela Bhansali; Respondent No. 2: Respondent No. 2; Respondent No. 5: Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (criminal) / Final Disposal (judgment Dismissing Petition)
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Freedom of Speech and Expression, Artistic Licence, Public Interest Litigation, Film Certification, Procedure for Registration of FIR
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Media and Entertainment Law Freedom of Speech and Expression Artistic Licence Public Interest Litigation Film Certification Procedure for Registration of FIR

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manohar Lal Sharma

Petitioner

Sanjay Leela Bhansali

Respondent No. 1

Respondent No. 2

Respondent No. 2

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI)

Respondent No. 5

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (criminal) / Final Disposal (judgment Dismissing Petition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the film 'Padmavati' can be exhibited in other countries without CBFC certification
  2. 2 Whether the Court should direct CBI to register an FIR against respondents for alleged offences
  3. 3 The scope of artistic licence under freedom of expression

Ratio Decidendi

Since the film's certification is pending with CBFC, the Court cannot pre-judge or intervene; prayer for direction to CBI lacks any legal foundation as no offence is made out and police has no role for alleged IPC sections; the petition and its pleadings are scurrilous, vexatious and abuse of PIL process, merit dismissal.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petition dismissed with no costs
  • Scurrilous, vexatious portions of pleadings struck off the record