CASE STUDY - 2

MEDIA LAW

Gangubai Kathiawadi - An artistic

expression within parameters of law

Varsha V
210755167577
MAFC
INTRODUCTION

Women invitingly standing at the doorstep of a kotha (brothel) in the

bustling bylanes of south Mumbai’s infamous red-light area Kamathipura,
is a scene that is real, tragic and dramatic. Director Sanjay Leela
Bhansali’s film ‘Gangubai Kathiawadi’, set entirely against this gritty
backdrop of Mumbai tells the story of many a young women, who were
sold off to brothels for a few hundreds, solely through the eyes of its
protagonist Gangubai (Alia Bhatt).

It’s sometime in the early 1950s or 1960s when a starryeyed and naïve
Ganga is conned by her own lover Ramnik (Varun Kapoor) to elope with a
promise that he will pave the path for her to make it as a heroine in
Bollywood. What turns out and the truth as we all know is that that Ganga
(who rechristens herself as Gangu, and eventually Gangubai), ends up
being the heroine of Kamathipura instead. Over the years, Kamathipura
becomes her home, the brothel girls her family and all of Kamathipura her
domain. But her journey is fraught with challenges, opponents and a
social stigma that brings out the fighter within her.

The beauty of the film lies in how it shows Gangu’s character transform
through various stages in her life. The narrative takes time to build up,
even slowing down along the way, but not without leaving an impact
through fiery dialogues and powerful moments.
It’s an Alia Bhatt show all the way, as she slips into the role of the
bosslady in a world-full of brothels and lustful men. It might take a while
to feel comfortable with the idea of Alia playing this part, but by the end
of it, you find yourself rooting for her - especially when you watch her
dish out dialogues with supreme confidence, audacity and a killer instinct.

Bhansali drives his narrative much like the book with each challenge and
episode moving like a chapter. While there is a lot packed into the film -
like how Gangu turns into an activist for the women in Kamathipura, her
liaison with the city’s underbelly and her political aspirations — we are
still left craving to know more about the rest of her life and how it all
unfolded. There are some beautifully crafted, heartbreaking moments in
Bhansali’s signature style - with a lot of finesse and flair - however, the
narrative does not delve deep into any one aspect of Gangu’s life. The
production value is top-notch. Each song is masterfully and colourfully
picturised - even while Gangu stands like a vision in white in the midst of it
all. But none of the songs, other than Dholida, are too memorable.

Like every other Bhansali film, this one, too, is a visual delight. While the
camera captures the dark alleys of Mumbai’s red-light area, it does so with
extravagance and ample gloss. Yes, the story brings to the fore some
poignant truths about our society, the lives of sex-workers and raises
some hard-hitting and pertinent questions, but there is plenty about her
life that remains untold. The plot holds on to some hugely dramatic
scenes and clap-worthy dialogues, which keep you engaged, in a film that
feels too long for it’s run-time. Yet, when you leave the theatre, the larger-
than-life world recreated with Bhansali’s vision lingers on your mind and
the mystery sorrounding Gangubai’s eventful life piques your interest
even more.

ISSUES ADDRESSED
Babuji Rawji Shah, who claims to be the adopted son of Gangubai, filed a
complaint against Sanjay Leela Bhansali and Alia Bhatt stating that
against Gangubai's portrayal as a prostitute and mafia queen on whose
life the film is purportedly based, against the Bombay High Court's order
declining him various reliefs such as interim stay on the release of the
movie and he also claimed that the release of the film’s trailer affected his
family’s reputation in the red light district of Kamathipura.
ISSUES ADDRESSED
Babuji Rawji Shah, who claims to be the adopted son of Gangubai, filed a
complaint against Sanjay Leela Bhansali and Alia Bhatt stating that
against Gangubai's portrayal as a prostitute and mafia queen on whose
life the film is purportedly based, against the Bombay High Court's order
declining him various reliefs such as interim stay on the release of the
movie and he also claimed that the release of the film’s trailer affected his
family’s reputation in the red light district of Kamathipura.

LEGAL SECTIONS STATED IN THE CASE

Cinematograph Act, 1952 - An Act to make provision for the
certification of cinematograph films for exhibition and for regulating
exhibitions by means of cinematographs.
Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution - guarantees freedom of speech
and expression to all people.

ISSUES AND REASON

The petitioner pleaded that the trailer of the film “titled after his mother
and a chapter in a book on her, which it is adapted out of”, reduces his
mother to a “prostitute” and a “mafia queen”.

He also claimed that the release of the film’s trailer affected his family’s
reputation in the red light district of Kamathipura. Expanding on it, the
trailer allegedly made women of his family fall prey to abusive comments
by men, who were trolled for their adopted mother’s standing as
displayed in the upcoming flick.

However, the initial suit seeking a permanent injunction from the making
and telecast of the film was dismissed by a civil court in Mumbai. But
another case seeking a stay on the film is still impending before the
Supreme Court, which is considering the aftermath of the film on the
protagonists’ claimed families.

Based on the life of Ganga Harjeevandas Kathiawadi, the film is an

adaptation of a chapter from a book titled Mafia Queens of Mumbai.
Gangubai was known for her strong personality and political leadership in
Bombay's infamous red-light district of Kamathipura and hence the
Bhansali film follows the journey of her as a vulnerable child sold off to
sex trade to her rising as a matriarch.
However, there aren’t many contemporary accounts of Gangubai’s life to
verify the stories told about the phenomenal woman. Hussain Zaidi’s
book, archiving the history of women in ganglands, treasures a chapter on
some facets of her life.

The top court, which dismissed the petition, said in the detailed order
that there are no materials disclosed or pleadings to show, even prima
facie (evidence), that the petitioner was a family member or a near
relative of Gangubai.

The film certificate issued by the CBFC prima facie shows that the film
is not defamatory. "Prima facie, it appears that the movie is an artistic
expression within the parameters of law," the order said. The apex
court noted that the film has already been given the requisite
certificate by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) under the
Cinematograph Act, 1952.

The top court said however that an injunction action can be initiated
even after a certificate is issued under the Cinematograph Act. The
Court may examine the film and judge whether its public display
breaches the norms of decency or contravenes the law. At the same
time, it has to be kept in mind that the they require the CBFC to be
responsive to the values and standards of society and also take note
of social changes.

Senior advocates C Aryama Sundaram, Mukul Rohatgi, Siddharth Dave

and Dhruv Mehta, appearing for the filmmakers, had argued that
phenomenal expenses have been incurred in producing the film and
the court should not restrain the release of the film at the last
moment.

They submitted that the film is based on book "The Mafia Queens of
Bombay" and eulogises the protagonist "Gangubai" and she has not
been defamed. The lawyers had argued that the respondents cannot
be denied their fundamental right of freedom of speech and
expression guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution.

They also contended that the petitioner could not have claimed the relief
of injunction without first seeking a declaration of his status as adopted
son of Gangubai and he needs to prove that he is a family member.
 Advocate Rakesh Singh, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, had
submitted that the fundamental right to freedom of speech and
expression is subject to restrictions and there is no fundamental right
to defame.

He had also sought a stay on release of the movie 'Gangubai

Kathiawadi'. The high court, in its order passed on July 30 last year,
had rejected the application noting that any content of defamatory
nature dies with that person's death.

"It is for the appellant (Shah) to demonstrate that he is the adoptive son
of deceased Gangubai Kathiawadi, which he has prima facie failed to do,"
the high court said, adding that in a case of defamation, a person can
bring action in Court of law if he claims to have been defamed.

The high court stated that simply because the Appellant claims to be the
son of such a person, he does not have the legal right to demonstrate
indulgence. Prior to this, a lower court dismissed Shah's defamation
complaint, prompting him to file an appeal at the high court, which also
declined to provide him any temporary relief.

CONCLUSION
The movie was released and gathered lots of appreciation at the box
office and none of the audiences reacted in a negative way. People saw
the dedication Gangubai showed on her work by helping poor as well her
determination to continue serving the people of Mumbai. Her legacy
lives on in the form of the many lives, she has helped to improve. As the
movie concludes, I feel the movie left a positive note, signifying the
importance of service and perseverance in the face of adversity.

REFERENCES
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/sc-
dismisses-plea-seeking-stay-on-gangubai-kathiawadi-release-calls-it-
an-artistic-expression-within-parameters-of-
law/articleshow/89830293.cms?from=mdr
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2344756/alia-bhatts-gangubai-faces-
legal-issues-over-representation-a-week-before-its-release