Movie on 2020 Delhi Riots Faces Legal Hurdle as HC Reserves Order

The Delhi High Court on Friday reserved its verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the release of the movie 2020 Delhi, based on the 2020 North-East Delhi riots, and its trailer on YouTube.

Key Developments in Court

Justice Sachin Datta reserved the judgement after hearing multiple petitions opposing the film’s release. The three petitions were filed by:

1. Sharjeel Imam (a riots accused).
2. Tasleem Ahmed, Akil Ahmed, Sonu (riots accused) & Sahil Parvez, Mohd. Sayeed Salmani (riots victims).
3. Umang, an independent candidate contesting the upcoming Delhi Assembly elections.

Arguments Against the Movie’s Release

• Advocate Mehmood Pracha argued that the film violates Section 5(b) of the Cinematograph Act and the Contempt of Courts Act as it refers to the 2020 riots as “true events.”
• Advocate Warisha Farasat, appearing for Sharjeel Imam, claimed that the trailer unfairly portrays Imam as the main conspirator, potentially affecting his ongoing trial under UAPA.
• Counsel for the independent candidate argued that the movie could influence voters ahead of the Delhi Assembly elections and impact free and fair elections.

Defence by the Filmmakers

• Senior Advocate Jayant Mehta, representing the production house, maintained that:
  • The film has not yet received CBFC certification and will not be publicly screened until approval.
  • A disclaimer in the trailer states that the movie is a dramatised version of events based on public records.
  • YouTube trailers do not require certification, and there is no legal ground to demand its removal.
• ASG Chetan Sharma, appearing for the Union Government and CBFC, argued that:
  • The petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable, as the government has not acted in contravention of the law.
  • The IT Rules, 2021 require that social media platforms hosting the content be made a party to such petitions, which was not done in this case.

Court’s Observations and Next Steps

• The High Court reserved its judgement, stating, “I’ll pass the order,” without specifying a date.
• The matter will be closely watched, as it involves issues of free speech, fair trial, and election influence.

Key Takeaways

• No public screening of the film until CBFC certification.
• Petitioners argue the film prejudices accused persons and could affect elections.
• The government maintains that legal procedures must be followed before seeking a ban.

The final ruling by the Delhi High Court will determine whether 2020 Delhi can proceed with its release or face further restrictions.