Delhi High Court Directs Special Screening Of ‘Udaipur Files’ With CBFC Cuts For All Counsels In Plea By Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind; Says Screening “Will Not Forestall Right To Challenge”
|The Bench clarified that private screening of the film does not affect the petitioners’ legal right to object, even after viewing the revised version.
The Delhi High Court today directed a special private screening of the film 'Udaipur Files – Kanhaiyalal Tailor Murder' to be arranged by the producer for all counsels involved in a petition filed by Maulana Arshad Madani, President of Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, seeking to restrain the film’s theatrical release. The film is slated for release on July 11, and the petition alleges it promotes hate speech and violates certification guidelines under the Cinematograph Act, 1952.
A Bench of Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyay and Justice Anish Dayal directed, “We require the producer to arrange for a screening of the film and the trailer today itself at some convenient time to all counsels. List tomorrow.”
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal appeared for Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind. He submitted, “This is a matter of some moment, I can understand they have a right to free speech and well as they are entitled to make any kind of film. But if the intent of the film is to fuel disharmony and endanger public order.”
Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, appearing for the Union of India, informed the Court that all problematic content had already been addressed by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). He said, “We have addressed all the issues, I have a chart. All the offending portions and offending references and dialogues… they all have been taken down.”
He confirmed that 40–50 cuts were made to both the film and the trailer.
Sibal, however, urged that even with deletions, the overall messaging remained harmful, stating, “Even if some parts are taken down, the film's overall tenor remains problematic. Free speech doesn't mean you can fuel violence or target a community. You'll have to watch the film to understand, just removing a few clips isn't enough.”
When asked by the Bench whether the cuts were made on the CBFC’s direction, the ASG responded, “Yes.” Sibal then urged the Court, “Your Lordships may kindly watch the film.”
Advocate Pulkit Agarwal, appearing for the film’s producer, suggested that the screening might resolve the dispute and raised concerns about repeated objections. He said, “We play the movie, we play the trailer, tomorrow again, the petitioner comes and says, this is objectionable, that is objectionable.” To this, the Chief Justice responded, “Why not? What is this? If something is found objectionable, whether screening will forestall their right to challenge it?”
When Agarwal proposed that a Court-appointed officer be sent to attend the screening, the Chief Justice firmly declined, stating, “For what purpose? No, we will watch ourselves.”
The Bench also made it clear that such a screening does not foreclose the petitioners’ right to seek legal remedies. “No, we will watch ourselves. Please, be sensible and be reasonable… Merely because you are arranging a screening will forestall their right to challenge? Their challenge may fail, it may succeed. But what is this? Can we forestall anybody’s right to come to the court? No.”
In its petition, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind has alleged that the film portrays the Muslim community in a prejudicial and inflammatory manner, violating the CBFC Guidelines, 1991, and Section 5B of the Cinematograph Act. It submits that the film’s trailer includes dialogues and depictions that amount to hate speech, and argues that the CBFC acted in breach of its statutory duty by certifying the film.
The Court will hear the matter tomorrow.
Cause Title: Maulana Arshhad Madani v. Union of India & Ors. (W.PP. (C)- 9362/2025)