SHYAM BHARTEEY vs CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM CERTIFICATION REGIONAL OFFICER DELHI & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 10th September, 2025 + RFA-IPD 1/2023 SHYAM BHARTEEY .....Petitioner Through: Appellant in person versus CENTRAL BOARD OF FILM CERTIFICATION REGIONAL OFFICER DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr. Amit Kumar Rana, Adv. for JD-1 and JD-2 % CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA JUDGMENT MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J: 1. The present appeal was earlier filed as a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to raise a challenge to the refusal of grant of certification of the Central Board of Film Certification (‘CBFC’) for public exhibition of the Appellant’s film i.e., ‘Masoom Kaatil’ (Hindi). 2. This Court vide order dated 02.12.2022 observed that under Section 5C of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 (‘Act of 1952’), an appeal would lie challenging an order refusing to grant a film certificate. It was observed that earlier the said appeal used to lie before the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) constituted under Section 5D of the Act of 1952. The Court Signature Not Verified RFA-IPD 1/2023 Page 1 of 16 Signed By:HEMANT PRATAP SINGH Signing Date:11.09.2025 15:56:38 further observed that upon enactment of the Tribunal Reforms Act, 2021 the FCAT has since been abolished, the appeal would lie to the High Court. 2.1. The Court referred to the Office Order issued by Hon’ble the Chief Justice of this Court dated 07.07.2021whereby any appeal under Section 5C of the Act of 1952, until the framing of the Rules in that regard was to be registered as ‘RFA-IPD’. 2.2. In the light of the said observation the original writ petition filed was directed to be renumbered as ‘RFA-IPD 01/2023’. Appellant’s Case 3. The Appellant herein is the proprie