SESSION: 2021-22

SUBJECT: ENGLISH

TOPIC: THE DA VINCI CODE {A/V} –

AGAINST THE BAN

SEMESTER - II

SUBMITTED TO:
RAKESH NAMBIAR
School of law, NMIMS (Deemed to be University)

SUBMITTED BY:
SHIKHAR SANADAYA
B.A LLB(DIVISION-B)

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction……………………………………………………………………….……..3
2. Facts of the case…………………………………………………………………………3
3. Relevant statutory provisions ……………………………………………………..……4
4. Judicial History ……………………………………………………………….......……7
5. Legal Issue …………………………………………………………………...………,…10
6. Arguments Against the Ban…………………………………………………………….11
7. Counter Arguments ……………………………………………………………………..12
8. Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………….13
9. Bibliography……………………………………………………………………….…….13

INTRODUCTION
The Da Vinci code is a 2006 American mystery thriller film directed by Ron
Howard, screen played by Akiva Goldsman. The film is based on fictious
thriller novel of same name written by Dan brown, In the movie Robert
Langdon is a handsome professor from Harvard University of religious
symbology, is a major suspect in abnormal murder of Louvre Curator Jacques
Sauneire. In fact, the unfortunate murdered man was found with a series of
symbols and codelike a pentagram and a Fibonacci number sequence. However,
after receiving a warning about the captain's true intentions, police investigator
Fache will begin pursuing Langdon. Sophie carries a key with dots and the
number 24 inscribed on it, which unlocks for her and Langdon a large and
complicated investigation involving a potentially heretical theory: Jesus Christ
and Mary Magdalene were, in fact, a couple who had a daughter named Sara.
The Priory of Sion, a millenarian sect, has held the mystery of that issue for
centuries. Sibilas, an Opus Dei member and masochist, will pursue Langdon and
Sophie in order to prevent them from solving the mystery of Christ and Mary
Magdalene, as well as the true meaning and location of the Holy Grail. Langdon
will be assisted in his quest by a dedicated British researcher who will disclose
various symbolisms in Da Vinci's masterpiece. The Last Supper, as well as
visits to mythological locations in the United Kingdom, such as The Church
Temple, where a number of Templar Knights is said to be buried, and Sir Isaac
Newton's tomb at Westminster Abbey, where some of the essential keys to
solving the Holy Grail's mystery are kept.

FACT OF THE CASE

The Da Vinci Code, a Hollywood production based on the bestselling 2003
novel by author Dan Brown[2], has been the subject of recent debate. It's a
mystery/detective story with elements of Christianity and Jesus Christ (his
relationship with Mary Magdelene). Apart from a few hiccups and objections,
the film was released with a bang on May 18, 2006[3] in most Western
Christian countries. Despite the fact that the novel has been on sale in India
(both original and pirated versions) since its release, Christian communities in
numerous Indian states have demanded that the film be banned from screening
due to its ostensibly anti-Christian content. Following special screenings for a
number of Catholic leaders, including the Information and broadcasting
minister. The Censor Board finally issued the film a 'A' classification and
cleared it, thanks to Broadcasting Minister Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi. However,
the Board required Sony Pictures to include a 15-second legal disclaimer card
at the beginning and end of the film, declaring that it was simply a work of
fiction.
The story, however, does not finish here. Several Christian organisations
continued to protest after the film was cleared, and seven state governments
eventually banned it. In certain localities, Muslims joined in the protests as well.
The plot was said to be intended to offend both Christians and Muslims'
religious sensitivities!! Meanwhile, a petition to the Supreme Court has been
filed seeking a blanket ban on not only on movie but also on novel. The petition
was based not only on the film but also on the novel, yet it was turned down.
Following that, the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Kerala, and Tamil Nadu
quashed the ban in their respective states.

RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS

(A) Article 19 the Indian constitution states that “Protection of certain rights
regarding freedom of speech etc.
(1) States that all citizens have the right to freedom of speech and expression.
Freedom of Speech and expression means the right to express one's own
convictions and opinions freely by words of mouth, writing, printing, pictures or
any other mode. It thus includes the expression of one's idea through any
communicable medium or visible representation, such as gesture, signs, and the
like. This expression connotes also publication and thus the freedom of press is
included in this category. Free propagation of ideas is the necessary objective
and this may be done on the platform or through the press. This propagation of
ideas is secured by freedom of circulation. Liberty of circulation is essential to
that freedom as the liberty of publication. Indeed, without circulation the
publication would be of little value. The freedom of speech and expression
includes liberty to propagate not one's views only. It also includes the right to
propagate or publish the views of other people; otherwise this freedom would
not include the freedom of press. 

(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
(B) The Cinematograph Act,1952 –
Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) is a Statutory body under Ministry
of Information and Broadcasting, regulating the public exhibition of films under
the provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952.

Vision : To ensure the good and healthy entertainment in accordance with the
provisions of the Cinematograph Act 1952 and the Cinematograph
(Certification) Rules 1983.

Mission :

1. To ensure healthy entertainment, recreation and education to the public.

To make the certification process transparent and responsible. To create
awareness among advisory panel members, media and film makers about
the guidelines for certification and current trend in films through
workshops and meetings.
2. To adopt modern technology for certification process through
computerization of certification process and upgradation of infrastructure.
To maintain transparency about Board’s activities through voluntary
disclosures, implementation of e-governance, prompt replies to RTI
queries and publication of annual report. To develop CBFC as a Centre of
Excellence

Films can be publicly exhibited in India only after they have been certified by
CBFC. The Board consists of non-official members and a Chairperson (all of
whom are appointed by the Union Government) and functions with
headquarters at Mumbai. It has nine Regional Offices at Mumbai, Kolkata,
Chennai, Bangalore, Thiruvananthapuram, Hyderabad, New Delhi, Cuttack and
Guwahati. The Regional Offices are assisted in the examination of films by
Advisory Panels. The Union Government nominates the Members of the panels
by drawing people from different walks of life for a period of two years. The
Certification process is in accordance with The Cinematograph Act, 1952, The
Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983, and the guidelines issued by the
Central government u/s 5 (B). At present films are certified under 4 categories

"U" - Unrestricted Public Exhibition "UA" - Unrestricted Public Exhibition -

but with a word of caution that Parental
discretion required for children below
12 years

"A" - Restricted to adults "S" - Restricted to any special class of

persons

The principles for guidance in certifying films The Cinematograph Act lays
down that a film shall not be certified if any part of it is against the interest of
the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations
with foreign States, public order, decency or involves defamation or contempt
of court or is likely to incite commission of any offence. Under section 5B(2)
the Central Government has issued the following guidelines. A film is judged in
its entirety from the point of view of its overall impact and is examined in the
light of the period depicted in the film and the contemporary standards of the
country and the people to whom the film relates, provided that the film does not
deprave the morality of the audience. Guidelines are applied to the titles of the
films also.

(C) Article 19(g) –

Article 19(1)(g) provides for the fundamental right of the citizens to

practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.

Scope –

(1) The right to carry on a business also includes the right to shut down
the business.
 (2) There is no right to hold a particular job of one’s choice. For example,
in the case of closure of an establishment, a man who has lost his job
cannot say that his fundamental right to carry on an occupation is
violated. 
(3) There is no right to carry on any dangerous activity or any antisocial
or criminal activity.
(4) No one can claim a right to carry on business with the government.
(5) The right to trade does not include the right of protection from
competition in trade. Thus, loss of income on account of competition
does not violate the right to trade under Article 19(1)(g).

(D) ARTICLE 19 (6) -  Provides that the fundamental right under

Article 19(1)(g) can be restricted in the following ways:

1. By imposing reasonable restrictions in the interest of the general

public.
2. By state monopoly: Sub-clause (ii) of Article 19(6) enables the state to
make laws for creating state monopolies either partially or completely
in respect of any trade or business or industry or service. The right of a
citizen to carry on trade is subordinated to the right of the state to
create a monopoly in its favour.

JUDICIAL HISTORY / PRECENDENTS

According to Justice Patanjali Shastri, Freedom of speech and of the press lay at
the foundation of all democratic organisations, for without free political
discussion no public education, so essential for the proper functioning of the
processes of popular government, is possible. Indian film industry has been
under fire recently due to ban imposed on some films which created breach of
peace and harmony in the society. There seems to be political interference in
getting the films banned either without any cuts or with cuts as per the whims
and fancies of some political leaders by way of pressuring the Central Board of
Film Certification (CBFC) which is the only regulatory body put in place to
censor the scenes which they consider to be objectionable.

(A) In Prem Mardi v. Union of India, the controversial film Messenger of

God which was called by the Sikh organisations as blasphemous was
 allowed to be filmed by the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal
(FCAT) in its quick decision after an appeal was filed against the
decision of the CBFC for banning the same. This led the Chief of CBFC
along with all the other officials of the board to resign from their official
positions. This shows that the CBFC is not functioning autonomously but
has been a tool of exploitation from the political parties.

(B)In Sree Raghavendra Films v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, the

exhibition of the film ‘Bombay’ in its Telugu version was suspended in
Andhra Pradesh under Section 8(1) of the A.P. Cinemas Regulation Act,
1955, as it may cause hurting of sentiment of some community, despite
being certified by the Censor Board for unrestricted exhibition. As court
discovered that the authorities that suspended the movie had not watched
the movie at all hence therefore, the court quashed the suspension.

(C)In Crossword Entertainment Private v. Central Board of Film, the film is

loosely based on Dr. Kashi Nath Singh's popular Hindi novel Kashi ka
Assi, a satire on the commercialisation of the pilgrimage city, and fake
gurus who lure the foreign tourists. Assi Ghat is a ghat in Varanasi
(Banaras) on the banks of Ganges River, and the film is based in a
famous and historical locality by the ghat, on the southern end of
Banaras. The story of the film goes through the events including Ram
Janmbhoomi movement and Mandal Commission implementation.On 30
June 2015, the release of Mohalla Assi was stayed by a Delhi court for
allegedly hurting religious sentiments. Shortly after, an FIR was filed in
Varanasi against the actors for the alleged use of abusive language in the
film. The film has been banned by the CBFC. After a while, Delhi High
Court allowed the release of the film with one cut and adult certification,
setting aside the order of CBFC and was later.

(D) Ushaben Navinchandra Trivedi and...Vs Bhagyalaxmi chitramandir -

In this particular case, the plaintiffs sued for a permanent in junction

against the defendant to restrain them from exhibiting the film named
‘JAI SANTOSHI MAA’. It was contended that the film hurt the
religious feelings of the plaintiff in so far as
Goddesses Saraswati, Laxmi and Parwati were depicted as jealous and
ridiculed. It was observed that hurt to religious feelings has not been
recognized as a legal wrong. So no compensation was awarded to the
plaintiff.

(E) S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram

In the landmark case of S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram1,the issue was
regarding the granting of a “U” certificate to a film about caste based
reservations was revoked by the madras high court. The revocation was
challenged in the Supreme Court. The council for the government argued that
there would be violence undertaken by various groups and thus the certificate
being revoked is valid. The supreme court regarding the heckler's veto stated
that the solution was not to silence the speaker but instead it required the state to
carry out is constitutional responsibility of maintaining law and order.

“The expression of thought should be intrinsically dangerous to the public

interests. In other words the expression should be intrinsically dangerous to the
public interest. In other words, the expression should be inseparably locked up
with the action contemplated like the equivalent of a spark in a powdered keg ”

LEGAL ISSUES INVOLVED

 BAN ON THE MOVIE WILL BE A VIOLATION OF

BASIC FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF FREEDOM OF

1
.
 SPEECH AND EXPRESSION UNDER ARTICLE 19
(a) OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION, 1950.
 BARING THE MOVIE FROM RELEASE WILL BE A
DIRECT INFRINGEMENT OF THE ARTICLE 19 (g)
WHICH GIVES LIBERTY TO INDIVIDUAL TO
EARN THEIR LIVELIHOOD BY PROFESSION OF
THEIR CHOICE
 IS CONTENT IN THE MOVIE IS BLASPHEMOUS
FOR THE CHRISTIAN BELEIFS AND A BREACH
OF THE ARTICLE 25 OF THE INDIAN
CONSTITUTION, 1950?
 BAN ON THE MOVIE WILL WORK AS A
RESTRICTION OVER THE ARTIST’S
IMAGINATION, AND CAN SOMEONE’S MERE
IMAGINATION DAMAGE PEOPLE’S FIRM
RELIGIOUS BELEIFS?

ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE BAN-

(1) Ban on the movie is not justified and curtails the basic fundamental right
of individual of freedom of speech and expression provided under article
19 (a) and it’s a infringement of article 19 (g) which gives liberty to every
 individual to practice the profession of their choice and earn their
livelihood.
(2) Monetary setback – The ban on the movie will be a huge monetary
setback for the producers and filmmakers of the movie and will work as a
landmark decision for the penalty on the fictious movie. It will compel
other artist to restrict their imagination and creativity which is severely
hazardous for the intellectual treasure of the country.
(3) This movie is based on a fictional novel of dan brown which is written
with imagination and creativity and intention to entertain people not to
hurt the religious sentiments of people.
(4) The da vinci code by Dan Brown on which film is based was published
in year 2003 and the opposition to it came after over 3 years when movie
got launched. Then why should movie made on the same novel with the
same intention should get banned?
(5) The petition in itself is not maintainable to ban the movie as censor board
and the government had cleared the screening of the film with “A” 18 +
certificate and reasonable disclaimers, under The Cinematograph Act,
1952.

COUNTER ARGUMENTS-
(1) This movie is considered a direct attack against the core of
Chritanity by suggesting that christanity was founded as cover up
 and that the catholic church has hidden the truth also Christ’s
marriage for nearly two thousand years.
REPLY- Let me explain you what “fiction” is, fiction is something which is
totally based on imagination and creativity and imagination is not bounded
by the truth. On the other hand, when you talk about religion its solely
based on the faith and firm beliefs backed by sometimes facts. It’s a well
entrenched fact that someone’s mere imagination cannot damage anyone’s
firm beliefs.

(2) The novel suggests that Jesus was a mortal who married Mary
Magdalene had children together and that their descendants live in
France which attacked the very heart of the holy Gospel destroying
the divinity of chritianity.
REPLY- Many Christian countries from around the world, countries
which has adopted christianity as the official religion of the state had
taken this piece of literature as artwork and not as a blasphemeous
content and they have put forth individual right to freedom of speech and
expression. Then why should a secular country like India should ban this
movie and curtail right to freedom of speech and expression of the artist.
(3) The movie has also been criticized for its historical and scientific
inaccuracies.
REPLY- Historic and scientific inaccuracies are not a matter of concern
as movie is based on fictional novel and fiction provides liberty to the
artist to the artist to use imagination and creativity, rather than sticking to
facts.
(4) It also potrays the conservative catholic organization Opus-Dei in a
negative light.
REPLY- The movie do not have any intention to defame the organization
as the motive of the director was to entertain the people through his
movie. As I have mentioned the movie is a total fictional work and
nothing to do with reality. As an ancillary to it, its launched with certain
disclaimers and “A” 18 + certificate from censor board. Hence the movie
is not defamatory at all.

CONCLUSION
Therefore, in the light of the legal issues involved, arguments advanced,
reasons given And authorities cited, this must settle upon us that we need
to sort out our thinking and understand to not seek to enter into futile
endeavor and not put the ban Upon the movie. The authorities concerned
should also take steps to see that such ambiguous bans to be completely
done away with as it goes against the basic tenets of Not only humanity,
morals, ethics butal so our Constitution which as of today is the Supreme
law of the land. Hence the ban should be set aside by the hon’ble court.
We Should let the wind so fim agination and thoughts, of colors and
creativity be permitted. To blow through out the nation lest the country be
imprisoned in an iron curtain. We Cannot construct Siberian prisons in
the tropical landscape of our Constitution.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/341773/
2. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1810705/
3. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/63302638/
4. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1281288/
5. https://indiankanoon.org/doc/64385393/
6. https://blog.ipleaders.in/article-19-indian-
constitution/
7. https://www.legalserviceindia.com/
articles/fban.htm