CBFC Assures Bombay HC It Will Decide In 2 Days On Certification For Yogi Adityanath Biopic

The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) on Thursday told the Bombay High Court it will decide in two days on granting certification to the movie, “Ajey: The Untold Story of a Yogi”, which is purportedly based on the life of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Adityanath. 

The statement was made before a bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Neela Gokhale which was hearing a plea by the makers of the movie against CBFC’s non response to their application for certification of the movie. 

Initially the court rapped the censor board for “sitting on the application” and not passing the order within the timeline prescribed in the rules. 

Following this, the censor board said the applications would be decided within two days and communicated the same to  makers. 

The bench accepted the statement and disposed of the petition filed by the makers of the film.

Petition was filed by Samrat Cinematics, alleging “arbitrary, unreasonable and unexplained” delay in certifying their upcoming film, including its teaser, trailer and promotional song.

The plea claimed that the CBFC had also sought for a No Objection Certificate from the office of the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister.

The petitioners, represented by senior advocate Ravi Kadam and advocates Satatya Anand and Nikhil Aradhe, said the film — inspired by the book The Monk Who Became Chief Minister — is slated for release on August 1. However, despite applying for certification on June 5, the CBFC neither scheduled a screening nor processed their application.

Under the Rules, the Board is required to scrutinise applications within seven days and refer films for screening within 15 days. The filmmakers also alleged that the CBFC made an “erroneous and baseless” demand for a No Objection Certificate from the UP Chief Minister’s Office, though there is no such legal requirement.

On July 3, they reapplied under the priority scheme, paying thrice the normal fee as per Rule 33(2). A screening was scheduled for July 7 but was abruptly cancelled without explanation.

“The petitioner has in fact sought priority clearance and has paid thrice the amount,” Kadam told the court.

To this, the bench remarked: “You cannot sit on an application especially when they have paid the priority charges. The application has to be decided.”