B.A, L.L.B. (Hons.

) /Second Semester

ENGLISH RESEARCH PAPER (2020-2021)

RESERARCH PAPER TOPIC:-
DAM 999

SUBMITTED TO: Dr. Rakesh Nambiar

SUBMITTED BY: Mohnish Joshi
Roll No.: B047

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

Table of Contents

S.No. Particulars Page no.

1) Introduction: Background of the Case 3-6
2) Literature Review 7-8
3) Summary of the Movie 8-9
4) Facts of the Case 9-10
5) Relevant Statutory Provisions 9-10
6) Judicial History/Precedents 10-11
7) Legal Issues involved 11
8) Conclusion 13-14
9) Bibliography 15-17

Movie – dam 999

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

INTRODUCTION: BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
Opposing Representative(OR) : (“FOR”)

Dam 999 is a 3D science fiction catastrophe film, made in English, that was released in 2011.
This documentary, co-produced by the United Arab Emirates and India, was made by BizTV
Network in the UAE and directed by Sohan Roy. This film is based on the award-winning
short documentary DAMs, also known as "The Lethal Water Bombs", which documents the
Banqiao dam disaster that occurred in China in 1975, which claimed the lives of 250,000
people, and the subsequent issue Banqiao Dam predicted disaster for outdated dams all over
the world.

Emotional thrillers are categorised as films like these.

In the classic storey "The Nine Human Emotions," the storey is told by an all-Indian
ensemble, with Indian and Hollywood actors playing the characters.

It also tells the storey of a crumbling colonial dam that stands behind a plot concerning the
principles of kamasutra and lost love.

Development

Dam 999 was inspired by a number of real-life incidents. The film is a tribute to the 250,000
people who died in China's Banqiao Dam disaster in 19751.As per producer-director Sohan,
“The central character of the story is this dam and the life of a few mariners living near it.
There are nine characters in the movie, representing the Navarasa. I believe that every
individual is born with a sthayi bhava, but when his suppressed feelings burst, like a dam, it
changes.”2

1
REDIFF, https://movies-rediff-com.translate.goog/slide-show/2010/jun/22/slide-show-1-south-interview-with-
sohan-roy.htm?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem (last visited Jul.
28,2021)
2
THE HINDU, https://web-archive-
org.translate.goog/web/20091027010746/http://www.hindu.com/mp/2009/10/24/stories/2009102451611700.ht
m?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem (last visited Jul. 28,2021)

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

Casting

A well-known Indian actor, Ashish Vidyarthi, is one of the cast members. The film originally
had Thilakan, a veteran Malayalam actor, cast in a significant part. When the Film
Employees Federation of Kerala (FEFKA) made a statement indicating that they would not
screen a film if Thilakan was in it, the director offered him another role. Roy claimed that
they were unable to continue shooting without a replacement for Thilakan due to a potential
filming delay.

The film protagonist's father, Shankaran, was ultimately replaced by Rajit Kapur in the part.

Additionally, there have been unconfirmed rumours that the Malayalam Movie Artist's
Association (AMMA) was also involved in Thilakan's replacement.

Additionally, supporters of Thilakan demonstrated in Alappuzha, where the film was being
shot.

Filming

Dam999 began filming in Alleppey, Kerala3. The crew encountered a number of unexpected
challenges while filming the film.Thilakan, a veteran Malayalam actor who was supposed to
be a part of Dam 999, was forced to drop out due to his battle with AMMA.However, the
issue was resolved by substituting Bollywood actor Rajit Kapoor for Thilakan.Thilakan was
compensated with seven lakh rupees.4

While the previous issue was still brewing, another lead character from India walked out
during filming due to disagreements with the crew, bringing the film to a halt.The film’s star
cast was immediately changed, and the initial sequences in Kerala were completed as
planned.From various exotic locations in India, such as Ooty, the film’s shoot progressed to
Fujairah, UAE, where Dam 999 captured a couple of its sequences on an oil tanker.The

3
KERALA2010, https://kerala2010-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2010/02/shooting-of-999-to-commence-
at.html?m=1&_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited
Jul. 28,2021)
4
THE HINDU, https://www-thehindu-com.translate.goog/news/national/kerala/Suspended-from-AMMA-
Thilakan-says-he-will-not-give-up/article16462451.ece?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul. 28,2021)

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

film’s climax was compiled in an expensive set built by Art Director Padmashree Thotta
Tharani in Ramoji Film City in Hyderabad.5

Because of its story and title, the film captured the attention of the world while it was still in
post-production.Debates about the ever-present fear of outdated dams have begun to sprout
up around the world.DAM 999 has a cast and crew comprising 16 national and international
award winners.It includes Suresh Pai, one of Bollywood’s top lead editors who has won two
National Awards, Thotta Tharani, who has won three National Film Awards for art direction,
Shajith Koyeri, who won a National Film Award and a Film Fare Award in 2006, Pattanam
Rasheed, S.B. Satheesh, and V.Srinivas Murali Mohan.The visual effects were created by
EyeQube Studios.6

Novel

DAM999 – The Novel is published by Indra Publishing House and was released in the
market prior to the film’s release. Unexpectedly high demand for the novel arose.This novel
was written by director Sohan Roy and co-writer Naufal Ashraf.7

Controversies

The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) objected to the film’s depiction of the Tamil
Nadu-Kerala Mullaperiyar Dam dispute.M. Karunanidhi, the leader of the DMK, urged Tamil
Nadu Chief Minister J. Jayalalitha to ban the film for the sake of “people’s safety.” The film
was banned a day before its scheduled release on November 25 by the Tamil Nadu State
Government on the grounds that its release would disrupt the cordial relations between Tamil
Nadu and Kerala.8

Challenging the Tamil Nadu government's ban on screenings of his film Dam 999 in the
state, producer-director Sohan Roy filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court on 30

5
THE HINDU, https://web-archive-
org.translate.goog/web/20100520020411/http://www.hindu.com/cp/2010/05/14/stories/2010051450811000.htm
?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
6
THE NATIONAL, https://www-thenationalnews-com.translate.goog/uae/disaster-film-opens-dam-debate-
1.505780/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
7
DAILY PIONEER, https://www-dailypioneer-com.translate.goog/state-editions/bhopal/24025-huge-demand-
for-Sohan-roys-book-dam-999.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last
visited Jul.28,2021)
8
OUTLOOK, https://web-archive-
org.translate.goog/web/20120614063121/http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=742331&_x_tr_sl=aut
o&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem (last visited Jul. 28,2021)

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

November 2011, questioning the subjective satisfaction of the Chief Minister (on whose
directions the impugned 24 November order was passed), and focusing on "narrow political
objectives."He claimed that the order had no constitutional, let alone legal, foundation.

He claimed that the State halted the screening of the Hollywood film without hearing him or
providing him with an opportunity for clarification.The “arbitrary, unilateral, and unjustified
act” infringed on his fundamental right to liberty guaranteed by Article 19(1). (a). He
described the film’s content as “spreading the message about the consequences of dam
disasters around the world.”9

Mullaperiyar Dam Controversy10

The Mullaperiyar dam dispute is between two southern Indian states, Tamil Nadu and Kerala.
It was 116 years ago that the dam on the Periyar River was built to restore the river's flow.
The dam is entirely owned by the state of Kerala, but it was leased to Tamil Nadu on October
29, 1886 for 999 years.

The disputed state, Tamil Nadu, is completely reliant on the water of the Periyar River to
meet its agricultural and basic needs, so they are requesting that the dam’s water level be
raised.In this dispute, Kerala is not opposed to providing more water, but it is opposed to
providing more water to Tamil Nadu because raising the water level to a higher level poses a
threat to the 119-year-old dam.

The dam has also been declared an endangered structure, and any further increase in water
pressure may result in the dam collapsing, killing many people from Kerala and Tamil Nadu.
This is a major issue that is still being litigated in the Supreme Court, and the Court has
appointed Justice A.S. Anand to look into the matter, conduct an investigation, and make
recommendations to the government on its decision.

The most recent judgement issued by the government stated that the government did not
entertain the claim of the Tamil Nadu government to raise the dam level to 136ft, but it also

9
THE HINDU, https://www-thehindu-com.translate.goog/news/national/dam-999-producer-moves-supreme-
court-against-ban-on-film-in-tamil-nadu/article2675870.ece?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
10
IPLEADERS, https://www.google.com/amp/s/blog.ipleaders.in/everything-mullaperiyar-dam-dispute/amp/
(last visited Jul.28,2021)

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

did not entertain the desire of the Kerala government to lower the dam level and keep it at
120ft.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Directorate of Film Festivals v Gaurav Ashwin Jain11 where the Court opined that films are
a medium to express and communicate ideas, thoughts, information, messages, sentiments
and emotions

Union of India v. K. M. Shankarappa12 The Court made a very important observation that:
“We fail to understand the apprehension expressed that there may be a law and order
situation. Once an expert body has considered the impact of the film on the public and has
cleared the film, it is no excuse to say that there may be a law and order situation. It is for the
State Government concerned to see that law and order is maintained. In any democratic
society there are bound to be divergent views. Merely because a small section of the society
has a different view, from that as taken by the tribunal, and choose to express their views by
unlawful means would be no ground for the executive to review or revise a decision of the
tribunal. In such a case, the clear duty of the Government is to ensure that the law and order
is maintained by taking appropriate actions against persons who choose to breach the law.”

Harinder S.Sikka v. Union of India13.The Supreme Court said, “It is well settled that
the CBFC sometimes grants certificates subject to certain excisions and modifications.
Once the same are carried out, there cannot be any kind of obstruction for exhibition of
a film. That having been done, we do not see how any body, group,
association or individual can create any kind of disturbance in exhibition of the film.”

Sree Raghavendra Films v Government of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.14 In this case,despite
being certified by the Censor Board for unrestricted exhibition, the exhibition of the film
'Bombay' in its Telugu version was suspended in exercise of the powers under Section 8(1) of
the A.P. Cinemas Regulation Act,1955.The suspension was imposed due to concerns that it

11
(2006) 8 SCC 433.
12
(2001) 1 SCC 582.
13
Harinder S. Sikka vs Union Of India on 10 April, 2018 W.P.(C)No.313/18
14
1995(2) ALD 81

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

would hurt the feelings of certain communities.The order was quashed by the Court because
it was arbitrary and not based on proper evidence.

Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Prof. Manubhai 15. In this case, despite winning the
Golden Lotus award for best non-feature film in 1987 and receiving a ‘U’ certificate from the
Censor Board, Doordrashan refused to telecast Beyond Genocide, a documentary film about
the Bhopal Gas Disaster.The reasons cited by Doordarshan included, among other things, the
political parties raising various issues concerning the tragedy, and the victims’ claims for
compensation were pending.The Court in this case said, “Subject to Article 19(2), a citizen
has a right to publish, circulate and disseminate his views to mould public opinion on vital
issues of national importance. Hence, any attempt to thwart or deny the same would offend
Art. 19(1)(a). Under such circumstances, the burden would, therefore, heavily lie on the
authorities that seek to impose them to show that the restrictions are reasonable and
permissible in law.”

Aftershocks : The Rough Guide to Democracy (A/V) (2002) by Rakesh Sharma.Set in Gujarat
after the 2001 earthquake, this film examines the fate of marginal citizens in a welfare state
and engages in the debate of Environment vs Development.It demonstrates how the
government-owned mining company views the quake as a God-sent opportunity to acquire
two quake-affected lignite-rich villages. In 2002, the government-run Mumbai International
Film Festival also rejected it.

SUMMARY OF THE MOVIE16

The storey centres around nine characters, each playing a different role, and a dam that has
been there for a long time. Vinay (Vinay Rai) works in ships as a mariner in the novel. One
day, he and his son Sam (Jineeth Rath) journey to his father's birthplace in Kerala, India, to
meet his father, Shankaran (Rajit Kapur). Shankaran is an astrologer, as well as a doctor who
specialises in the ancient arts. Vinay wanted to treat Sam, but he had diabetes, so that is out
of the question.

15
AIR 1993 SC 171
16
HMOOB, https://www.hmoob.in/wiki/Dam999 (last visited Jul. 28,2021)

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

In the second plotline, Meera (Vimala Raman), Shankaran's lifelong ward, has lived under his
care, and serves as his daughter. In addition, she assists him with treating the numerous
patients he treats.

The friendship between Vinay and Meera is exceptionally deep and mutually supportive.
Even when she tells him she loves him, something dreadful happens. After realising this,
Meera stops loving Vinay, and he gets married to TV journalist Sandra (Linda Arsenio).

Vinay's emotional link with Meera is restored upon his return home with his son, and Meera
responds to his feelings.

In parallel, the corrupt Mayor Durai (Ashish Vidyarthi) is attempting to stop the construction
of a dam in his district.

The dam leaks in the movie at the conclusion, causing a high alert to be issued when the
heavy rains come.

FACTS OF THE CASE

• The film is set in the Indian state of Kerala,and the story is woven around a
catastrophe caused by the collapse of a dam built during the British Era.
Coincindentally,the Mullaperiyar Dam,located on the Kerala-Tamil Nadu border has a
very similar story.
• The dam was constructed in the British colonial era too.It has been a major concern in
the water dispute between the two states, Kerala and Tamil Nadu.The film was
banned in Tamil Nadu on the grounds that it may harm the cordial relations between
the two states,as well as the dam disaster shown in the movie might incite fear in the
minds of the common people residing in the area.
• The film was scheduled to release on November 25,2011.The movie had received a
clearance certificate from Central Board for Film Certification (CBFC).
• On November 24,2011 ,that is,a day before the its release,the film was banned by the
state government of Tamil Nadu on the pretext of public safety,and that the release of
the film might worsen the current situation of the ongoing dispute.
• On November 30,2011, director Sohan Roy moved to the Supreme Court and filed a
writ petition,challenging the Tamil Nadu state government’s order.

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

 • On December 8,2011, in response to Mr.Sohan Roy’s writ petition,the Supreme Court
directed the state government of Tamil Nadu to hear Mr.Roy’s objections by
December 12,2011 and pass appropriate orders by December 16,2011.
• On December 16,2011, Tamil Nadu government upheld the ban initially for two
weeks,and then for six months straight without any valid reason.
• On June 19,2011, the ban was further extended for three more months.
• In December,2011 ,the ban was further extended again for three months.
• On January 24,2013, the Supreme Court rejected Mr.Sohan Roy’s petition
challenging the extension of ban by the state government of Tamil Nadu on the
movie’s screening.

RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS

Article 19 of the Indian Constitution

19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc.—

(1) All citizens shall have the right—

(a) To freedom of speech and expression;

(b) To assemble peaceably and without arms;
(c) To form associations or unions[or co-operative societies];
(d) To move freely throughout the territory of India;
(e) To reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and
(f) To practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.

(2) “Nothing in sub-clause (a) of clause (1) shall affect the operation of any existing law, or
prevent the State from making any law, in so far as such law imposes reasonable restrictions
on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause in the interests of the sovereignty
and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public
order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an
offence.”

Section 5B(1) of Cinematograph Act,1952

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

5B. Principles for guidance in certifying films.—

(1) “A film shall not be certified for public exhibition if, in the opinion of the authority
competent to grant the certificate, the film or any part of it is against the interests of
19 [the sovereignty and integrity of India] the security of the State, friendly relations
with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or involves defamation or
contempt of court or is likely to incite the commission of any offence.”

JUDICIAL HISTORY/PRECEDENTS

Rangarajan v. P.Jagjivan Ram17

“If the film is unobjectionable and cannot constitutionally be restricted under Article 19(2),
freedom of expression cannot be suppressed on account of threat of demonstration and
processions or threats of violence.That would tantamount to negation of the rule of law and
a surrender to black mail and intimidation. It is the duty of the State to protect the freedom
of expression since it is a liberty guaranteed against the State.The State cannot plead its
inability to handle the hostile audience problem. It is its obligatory duty to prevent it and
protect the freedom of expression.”

Directorate of Film Festivals v Gaurav Ashwin Jain18

“ A film is a medium for expressing and communicating ideas, thoughts, messages,

information, feelings and emotions. It may be intended either for public exhibition
(commercial or non-commercial) or purely for private use. The requirement under sections 4
and 5A of the Act relating to certification by the Board, where the film is intended for public
exhibition, by applying the guidance principles set out in section 5B, is a reasonable
restriction on the exercise of the said right of speech and expression contemplated under
Article 19(2), and therefore, constitutional”

Manohar Lal Sharma v. Sanjay Leela Bhansali & Ors19

17
(1989) 2 SCC 574
18
(2007) 4 SCC 737
19
(2018) 1 SCC 770

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

“If states are banning a film, then it is destroying federal structure. It is a serious matter. If
somebody has a problem,then he or she can approach appellate tribunal for relief. State
can’t touch the content of a film.”

M/S Prakash Jha Productions & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors20

“It is for the State to maintain law and order situation in the State and, therefore, the State
shall maintain it effectively and potentially. Once the Board has cleared the film for public
viewing, screening of the same cannot be prohibited in the manner as sought to be done by
the State in the present case. As held in K.M Sankarapaa (Supra) it is the responsibility of the
State Government to maintain law and order.”

LEGAL ISSUES INVOLVED

• Whether the act of banning public screening of the film is “arbitrary, unilateral and
unjustified” and thus violates the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under
Article 19 of the Indian Constitution or not.
• Whether the action of the respondent state governments to ban the screening of the
concerned film in their respective states is unconstitutional and in violation of the
Indian Constitution or not.
• Whether a film cleared by the Central Board for Film Certification (CBFC) for
screening can be banned by a particular state on the pretext of public safety or not.
• Whether the movie “Dam 999” is related to real life events and Mullaperiyar Dam
and that it would disturb public order or not.

20
(2011) 8 SCC 372

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

CONCLUSION21

Additionally, the picture was simultaneously released in five other languages throughout the
world. It was shot aboard the world's largest ship, making it the first Indian feature film to
incorporate water graphics technology. DAM999 was India's first Hollywood-style film. The
film was also a "super-hit" in terms of accolades won. Additionally, it got five Academy
Award nominations in three categories.

Despite several prizes and widespread acclaim, the film remains prohibited.

It is available exclusively through internet streaming services such as Amazon Prime Video.

Tamil Nadu's political leaders continue to feel that the film is an attempt by the Kerala
government to justify its allegations regarding the Mullaperiyar dam's instability, and have
urged for a further suspension to the film's distribution.

Article 19(2)'s'reasonable' restriction was always for the public interest, but it has been
distorted multiple times to stifle free speech and expression.

As a result, we have been denied access to a number of films due to their inability to satisfy
the tastes of 'others.' If this is the case, the question is whether this constraint is truly
necessary.

India has always been justified on the basis of being a diverse country with a unique set of
issues, and the need for limits has been exaggerated. However, the constraints have harmed
rather than aided progress. Restricting films in the name of keeping public order, respecting
people's emotions, and other similar reasons is ludicrous in today's era of huge technological
breakthroughs. There are several alternative media outlets via which the general public can
learn about the news and perspectives depicted in films. As a result, restraint films are
ineffective.

21
LEGAL SERVICES INDIA, https://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/fban.htm (last visited Jul. 28,2021)

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

It is usually ideal for spectators to view the film independently and create their own
conclusions. While the average populace may be lacking in knowledge, they do not always
lack common sense. It is self-serving, corrupted groups that distort the subject and mislead
others in order to forward their own agendas. In comparison, no group takes on the role of a
true guide.

While the courts have done an admirable job in general, same difficulties have cropped up
often. As a result, a sustainable solution is necessary. One such effort could be to revise the
1952 Act entirely. Additionally, cancelling films that have been accepted by the Censor
Board is not only arbitrary, but it also signals a worrisome trend toward increased
intolerance.

However, in today's society, a rating organisation is preferable to a censor board. Again, the
authority to exercise limited censorship cannot be unilaterally handed to states. The
government may provide suggestions/recommendations, but the board must make the final
decision independently. As a result, if democracy is to evolve, film screenings must never be
refused for speculative reasons, because prohibiting films is equal to prohibiting free speech
and expression.

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Articles and Websites

• BizTV NETWORK, https://www-biztvnetworks-

com.translate.goog/?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem ,(last visited Jul. 28, 2021)
• LOS ANGELES CINEMA FESTIVAL OF HOLLYWOOD,https://www-
hollywoodcff-
com.translate.goog/2011_Best_Winners_(Spring).html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_
x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem&_x_tr_sch=http (last visited Jul.28,2021)
• HINDUSTAN TIMES,
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/sc-pulls-up-tamil-
nadu-on-dam-999-ban/story-ch72dV0F5ex4AzImW86EOK_amp.html (last visited
Jul.28,2021)
• THE NEW INDIAN EXPRESS, https://www-newindianexpress-
com.translate.goog/entertainment/malayalam/2010/feb/28/a-film-based-on-
mullaperiyar-dam-issue-135200.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul.28,2021)
• REDIFF, https://movies-rediff-com.translate.goog/slide-show/2010/jun/22/slide-
show-1-south-interview-with-sohan-
roy.htm?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
• THE HINDU, https://web-archive-
org.translate.goog/web/20091027010746/http://www.hindu.com/mp/2009/10/24/stori
es/2009102451611700.htm?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
• ONE INDIA, https://archive-
ph.translate.goog/20120709033707/http://entertainment.oneindia.in/malayalam/top-
stories/2009/thilakan-dam-999-hollywood-film-
030209.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last
visited Jul. 28,2021)
• NOWRUNNING, https://www-nowrunning-com.translate.goog/news/malayalam/its-
official;-thilakan-is-out-of-dam-

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

 999/30204/story.htm?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
• ONE INDIA, https://archive-
ph.translate.goog/20130220222948/http://entertainment.oneindia.in/malayalam/top-
stories/2010/rajath-replace-thilakan-
080310.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last
visited Jul. 28,2021)
• TIMES OF INDIA, https://m-timesofindia-
com.translate.goog/city/thiruvananthapuram/-Malayalam-film-body-gives-Thilakan-
another-chance/articleshow/5659957.cms?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul.28,2021)
• KERALA2010, https://kerala2010-blogspot-com.translate.goog/2010/02/shooting-of-
999-to-commence-
at.html?m=1&_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
• THE HINDU, https://www-thehindu-
com.translate.goog/news/national/kerala/Suspended-from-AMMA-Thilakan-says-he-
will-not-give-up/article16462451.ece?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
• THE HINDU, https://web-archive-
org.translate.goog/web/20100520020411/http://www.hindu.com/cp/2010/05/14/storie
s/2010051450811000.htm?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
• THE NATIONAL, https://www-thenationalnews-com.translate.goog/uae/disaster-
film-opens-dam-debate-1.505780/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
• DAILY PIONEER, https://www-dailypioneer-com.translate.goog/state-
editions/bhopal/24025-huge-demand-for-Sohan-roys-book-dam-
999.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last
visited Jul.28,2021)
• OUTLOOK, https://web-archive-
org.translate.goog/web/20120614063121/http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?art

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law

 id=742331&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=elem (last
visited Jul. 28,2021)
• THE HINDU, https://www-thehindu-com.translate.goog/news/national/dam-999-
producer-moves-supreme-court-against-ban-on-film-in-tamil-
nadu/article2675870.ece?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=hi&_x_tr_hl=en-
GB&_x_tr_pto=elem,se (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
• IPLEADERS, https://www.google.com/amp/s/blog.ipleaders.in/everything-
mullaperiyar-dam-dispute/amp/ (last visited Jul.28,2021)
• HMOOB, https://www.hmoob.in/wiki/Dam999 (last visited Jul. 28,2021)
• LEGAL SERVICES INDIA, https://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/fban.htm
(last visited Jul. 28,2021)

Cases

• (2006) 8 SCC 433.

• (2001) 1 SCC 582.
• Harinder S. Sikka vs Union Of India on 10 April, 2018 W.P.(C)No.313/18
• 1995(2) ALD 81
• AIR 1993 SC 171
• (1989) 2 SCC 574
• (2007) 4 SCC 737
• (2018) 1 SCC 770
• (2011) 8 SCC 372

Kirit P. Mehta School of Law