Mumbai: The Election Commission (EC) will now have to decide if the release of the biopic of PM Modi would violate the model code of conduct. Notably, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday refused to interfere in the matter as the EC has already issued notices to the producers of the film.
A bench of Chief Justice Naresh Patil and Justice Nitin Jamdar disposed a plea by a Pune-based activist, Satish Gaikwad, seeking a stay on the release of the Vivek Oberoi-starrer biographical drama. Gaikwad, the national president of Republican Party of India (I), had filed the plea through his counsel Tosif Shaikh, with an apprehension the film can influence voters.
When the matter was taken up for hearing on Monday, the counsel appearing for the EC informed the bench, the polling authority has already issued notices to the makers of the film. “We have sought their replies on the matter and will take a decision accordingly,” submitted the counsel appearing the EC.
Meanwhile, advocate Advait Sethna, appearing for the censor board, informed the bench that the film is yet to be certified from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). “We only granted a permission for the release of the film’s trailer. The actual certification for the film’s release is yet to be given.
We are likely to decide on the certification by Monday,” Sethna submitted. Having considered the submissions, CJ Patil said, “We do not deem it necessary to interfere in the matter, especially when the EC has already started its process. It is dealing with the matter, thus we dispose of the petition.”
The petition filed by Gaikwad highlighted the fact the EC had enforced the model code of conduct way back on March 10 for the upcoming 17 Lok Sabha election. He claimed actor-producer Suresh Oberoi has connived with others and has deliberately ensured the film releases during the election.
“All the respondent authorities including the makers of the film, have prima facie advertently disobeyed the model code of conduct. In furtherance, while releasing the film during the prevalence of the code of conduct, clearly shows that it is nothing but the infringement of the legal right (right to vote) of the citizens of the state,” Gaikwad had claimed.
