This document summarizes the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act of 1953 and its subsequent amendments in Maharashtra, India. The act provides for regulating film exhibitions using cinematographs and licensing places where films are shown. It establishes licensing authorities, application processes, and conditions for licenses. It also allows licensing authorities or the state government to suspend film exhibitions if they believe it could breach public order. Violations of the act or license terms are subject to fines and imprisonment. The document discusses several amendments over time that modified penalties, appeal processes, and licensing authority powers.
This document summarizes the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act of 1953 and its subsequent amendments in Maharashtra, India. The act provides for regulating film exhibitions using cinematographs and licensing places where films are shown. It establishes licensing authorities, application processes, and conditions for licenses. It also allows licensing authorities or the state government to suspend film exhibitions if they believe it could breach public order. Violations of the act or license terms are subject to fines and imprisonment. The document discusses several amendments over time that modified penalties, appeal processes, and licensing authority powers.
This document summarizes the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act of 1953 and its subsequent amendments in Maharashtra, India. The act provides for regulating film exhibitions using cinematographs and licensing places where films are shown. It establishes licensing authorities, application processes, and conditions for licenses. It also allows licensing authorities or the state government to suspend film exhibitions if they believe it could breach public order. Violations of the act or license terms are subject to fines and imprisonment. The document discusses several amendments over time that modified penalties, appeal processes, and licensing authority powers.
This document summarizes the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act of 1953 and its subsequent amendments in Maharashtra, India. The act provides for regulating film exhibitions using cinematographs and licensing places where films are shown. It establishes licensing authorities, application processes, and conditions for licenses. It also allows licensing authorities or the state government to suspend film exhibitions if they believe it could breach public order. Violations of the act or license terms are subject to fines and imprisonment. The document discusses several amendments over time that modified penalties, appeal processes, and licensing authority powers.
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as doc, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 19
Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1953
ACT No. XI ! 1953
[!7lh April 1953} Amended by Bom. 38 of 1955. Adapted and modified by the Bombay Adaptation of Laws (State and Concurrent Subects! "rder# 195$. Amended by Bom. 8 of 1958. Adapted and modified by the %aharashtra Adaptation of Laws (State and Concurrent Subects! "rder# &9$'. Amended by %ah. 1( of 19$'. ) ) ) 19 of 19$1 ) ) ) ( of 19*3. ) ) ) 3+ of 19*5 (1,1(,19*5! ) ) ) 39 of -9*$ (5,8,19*$! ) ) ) * of 198* (-,-,-98*! ) ) ) (' of -99& (($,8,1991! An Act to provide for regulating exhibitions by means of cinematographs and the licensing of places in which cinematograph flms are exhibited in the (State of Maharashtra) WHEREAS it is expedient to provide for regulating exhibitions by means of cinematographs and the licensing of places in which cinematograph flms are exhibited in the [State of Maharashtra]; It is hereby enacted as follows:- STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS. MAHARASHTRA STATE GAZETTE, Nov. 20, 1974 Section 7 of the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1953, lays down penalties for contravention of the Act and the Rules made thereunder and the conditions and restrictions subject to which a licence has been granted, etc- The penalties laid down thereunder are a fne which may extend to Rs. 1,000 ' and in the case of a continuing ofence a further fne which may extend to Rs. 100 for each day during which the ofence continues after conviction for the frst ofence. Many instances of the contraventions of the Act and Rules have of late come to notice, and it has also been observed that some of these contraventions are in furtherance of certain malpractices, such as, black-marketing of tickets. It is, therefore, considered necessary to provide for more deterrent- punishment for contraventions of the Act, Rules, etc. Section 7 of the Act is amended to achieve this object. Section 8 of the Act gives powers to the Licensing Authority to revoke or suspend a licence in the circumstances mentioned therein. Section 8-A intcr-alia provides for an appeal against such an order of revocation or suspension of a licence, and rule 132 of the Maharashtra Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1966, prescribes inter-alia that the period of appeal shall be 30 days from the date of receipt of the order by the appellant- In view of the period of appeal so prescribed, it is considered desirable that any order under Section 8 revoking or suspending a licence shall not take efect until the expiry of the period of appeal Section 8 of the Act is proposed to be amended for this purpose. MAHARASHTRA STATE GAZETTE, Jul. 16, 1976 Section 7 of the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1?53 provides for penalty extending to 3 months imprisonment or fne extending to Rs. 5,000 or with both. These penalties are provided for certain cases specifed in this section. Section 9 (3) of the Act empowers the State Government to make rules to provide for penalty for contravention of any rule which may extend to one thousand rupees. It is considered that penalty for contravention of rules should also be the same. The amendment of section 9(3) is designed to secure this object. 1. (1) This Act may be called the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1953. (2) It extends to the whole of the State of Maharashtra.] (3) It shall come into force [in the pre-Reorganisation State of Bombay] on such dale as the State Government may, by notifcation in the Ofcial Gazette, [appoint; and in the remaining part of the State of Maharashtra it shall come into force on the commencement of the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) (Extension and Amendment) Act, 1960] 2. In this Act, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context,- (a) "cinematograph" includes any apparatus for the representing of moving pictures or series of pictures; (b) "licensing authority" means the authority empowered to gram licences under section 4; (c) "place" includes a house, building, tent and any description of transport, whether by sea, land or air; (d) "prescribed" means prescribed by rules made under this Act. 3. Save as otherwise provided in this Act. no person shall give an exhibition by means of a cinematograph elsewhere than in a place licensed under tins Act or otherwise than in compliance with any conditions and restrictions imposed by such licence. 4. The authority having power to grant licences under this Act, shall be -- (i) in Greater Bombay, the Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay; (ii) in other areas for which a Commissioner of Police is appointed under section 7 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, such Commissioner; and (iii) elsewhere, the District Magistrate: Provided that the State Government may, by notifcation in the Ofcial Gazette, constitute for the whole or any part of the [State of Maharashtra] such other authority as it may specify in the notifcation to be the Licensing Authority for the purposes of this Act. 5. (1) The Licensing Authority shall not grant a licence under this Act, unless it is satisfed that - (a) the rules made under this Act have been substantially complied with, and (b) adequate precautions have been taken in the place, in respect of which the licence is to be given, to provide for the safety of persons attending exhibition therein. (2) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (1), the licensing authority may [with the previous sanction of the State Government] grant licences under this Act to such persons as that authority thinks ft [on payment of such fees,] and on such terms and conditions and subject to such restrictions as may be prescribed [or may, after recording in writing its reasons therefor, refuse to grant any such licence.] (3) The State Government may, from time to time, issue directions to licensees generally or to any licensee in particular for the purpose of regulating the, exhibition of any flm or class of flms so that scientifc flms, intended for educational purposes, flms dealing with news and current events, documentary flms or indigenous flms secure an adequate opportunity of being exhibited, and where any such directions have been issued, those directions shall be deemed to be additional conditions and restrictions subject to which the licence has been granted. Note:- From the afdavit fled on behalf of the State Government it appears that the only ground of objection to the grant of the "No Objection Certifcate" was that contrary to the terms of Rule 89 the respondents had constructed the "annexe" before the State Government considered their application for a "No Objection Certifcate". It appears however from the report of the Licensing Authority that plans of the building intended to be constructed complied with the rules framed under the Act and the building constructed did not contravene the provisions of the Act and the Rules. Rule 89 authorises the Licensing Authority to allow the conversion of an existing building into a Cinematograph theatre. Therefore the completion of the building before the Government considered the request for a no objection certifcate did not constitute a bar to the exercise of jurisdiction to grant the certifcate, and the District Magistrate was right in his view that the certifcate applied for should be granted. In dismissing the appeal preferred to "the State Government it was recorded that the Government did "not see any reason to change the decision already taken by the District Magistrate" and that decision was communicated to the respondent by letter dated July 9, 1964. The order of the State Government which is a reafrmation of its original decision communicated through the Licencing Authority gives no indication that the objections raised in the memorandum of appeal were considered. It sets out no reasons in support of the order. The authority which made the order on behalf of the State Government appears to have been oblivious of the circumstances in which the building was constructed. The Government did not consider whether a building already in existence which complied with all the requirement of the Rules should be allowed to be converted into a Cinematograph theatre. It was urged on behalf of the State Government that under rule 5 (2) in Chapter II the State Government has absolute discretion to grant permission for the issue of a "No Objection Certifcate" to the applicant. Under the Act the District Magistrate and not the State Government is the Licensing Authority. Granting that the State Government may validly control the exercise of power by the Licensing Authority; on that question we express no opinion - the State Government cannot relying upon the Rules assume to itself the jurisdiction of the Licensing Authority to issue the licence. Power to control the Licensing Authority under sec. 5 is not the power to supplant the Licensing Authority. Again the power to grant a licence under the Act is quasi-Judicial and by the use of the expression "absolute discretion" n is not intended to invest the Licensing Authority with arbitrary power so as to destroy the limitations to which it is subject by its inherent nature. The Act does not purport to confer arbitrary authority upon the Licensing Authority or the Slate Government, and by the use in the rules of the expression absolute discretion (he legislative intent disclosed by the Act cannot be superseded. The State of Gujrat v M/S Krishna Cinema 1971 (3) Born LR SC per Shah J. 6. (I) The State Government in respect of the whole "[of the [State of Maharshtra]] or any part thereof or the Licensing Authority in respect of the area within its jurisdiction, may, if it is of opinion that any flm which is being publicly exhibited is likely to cause a breach of public order, by order, suspend the exhibition of the Him and during such suspension such flm shall be deemed lo be an uncertifed flm [in the area specifed in the order.] (2) When an order under sub-section (I) has been issued by the Licensing Authority a copy thereof together with a statement of reasons therefor, shall forthwith be forwarded by the licensing authority to the State Government and the State Government may either confrm or annul the order. (3) An order made under sub-section (1) shall, unless it is annulled by the Stale Government under sub-section (2), remain in force for a period of two months from the date thereof but the State Government may, if it is of opinion that the order should continue in force, extend the period of suspension from time to time for such further period as it thinks ft- 7. [(1)] If a cinematograph, or any place licensed under this Act, is used in contravention of the provisions of this Act, or of the rules made thereunder, or of the conditions and restrictions upon or subject to which any licence has been granted under this Act, [or if a cinematograph is used by any person in any place of which a licence granted under this Act is revoked or suspended under Section 8] or if any person in charge of a cinematograph contravenes any of the conditions or restrictions imposed by an order of exemption made under section 10, then the owner, or person in charge of the cinematograph, or the occupier of the place, as well as the managers, servants or agents of the person to whom the licence is granted, shall be guilty of an ofence; and shall, on conviction, [shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fne which may extend to fve thousand rupees or with both; and in the case of a continuing ofence, a further fne which may extend to Five hundred rupees for each day during which the ofence continues after conviction for the frst such ofence:] Provided that, a person to whom a licence is granted shall not be guilty of an ofence as aforesaid, if he proves that any ofence committed by any person in his employ or on his behalf took place without his knowledge and consent, and that the employee or agent was not acting with his express or implied permission, and that he exercised all due deligence to prevent the commission of the ofence or its continuation.] [(2) If it appears to the court taking cognizance of an ofence under ihis Act, on taking such evidence as it may deem necessary, that die accused person is giving an exhibition in or at any place by means of a cinematograph without a licence granted under this Act, or in contravention of any conditions and restrictions imposed by such licence or by an order made under section 10, or when a licence is revoked or suspended under section S, the court may order:- (a) that the place in or at which such exhibition is being given shall be sealed and (b) that a cinematograph together with the machinery, appliances and apparatus, if any, be seized and kept in the custody of the licensing authority, until the complaint is fnally disposed of. (3) Where under sub-section (2), the court makes an order to seal the place and seize the cinematograph and the machinery, appliances and apparatus, it may, in that order, direct that the police shall render necessary help to the Licensing Authority in complying with the order so made. (4) Where any such accused person has been convicted for contravention of the provisions of the Act, the cinematograph and the machinery, appliances and apparatus seized under sub-section (2) may be forfeited to the Stale Government, and in case where such person is acquitted or discharged, the Licensing Authority shall remove the seal of the place sealed under sub-section (1) and the cinematograph and the machinery, appliances and apparatus seized and kept in the custody of the Licensing Authority, shall be returned to him.] 8. In the event of any contravention by the holder of a licence of any of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder or of any of the conditions or restrictions upon or subject to which the licence has been granted to him under this Act [or of any of the conditions or restrictions imposed by an order of exemption made under section 10], or in the event of his conviction of an ofence under section 7 of this Act or section 7 of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, [or on receipt of recommendation from the Collector under section 9D of the Bombay Entertainments Duty Act, 1923,] [the licensing Authority may by order revoke the licence] or suspend it for such period as it may think ft "[but such order shall not take efect until the period of appeal prescribed against such order has expired;] [Provided that, no licence shall be revoked or suspended unless the holder thereof has been given reasonable opportunity to show cause.] 8-A. Any person aggrieved by an order of a Licensing Authority Appeal. refusing to grant a licence, or revoking or suspending any licence under seciion 8. may, within such period as may be prescribed, appeal to the State Government, and the State Government shall, on such appeal, make such order as it thinks just and proper, and such order shall be fnal. 8-B. The State Government may either of its own motion, or upon an Revision. application made by an aggrieved person within such period as may be prescribed, call for and examine the record of any order made by a Licensing Authority under this Act, and pass such order thereon as it thinks just and proper: Provided that, (i) when rejecting an application for revision under this section, the State Government shall record its reasons for such rejection; and (ii) before any order is passed under this section, which is likely to afect any person adversely, such person shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard, 8-C. The State Government may, subject to such restrictions and Delegation conditions as it may impose, by notifcation in the Ofcial Gazette, delegate of powers!o the Commissioner its powers under section 8-A or 8-B.] 9. (1) The State Government may, by notifcation in the Ofcial Gazette, make rules for the purposes of carrying into efect the provisions of this Act. (2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing powers, such rules may provide for all or any of the following matters, namely:- (a) prescribing the procedure in accordance with which a licence may be obtained and the terms, conditions and restrictions, if any, subject to which licences may be granted under this Act; "[(a-i) prescribing the period within which an appeal may be made under section 8A or a revision application under section 8-B;] (b) providing for the regulation of cinematograph exhibitions for securing the public safety; (c) regulating the means of entrance and exit at places licensed under this Act; and providing for prevention of disturbances there at; (d) regulating or prohibiting the sale of any ticket or pass for admission by whatever name called to a place licensed under this Act. [(3) In making rules under this section, the State Government may provide that any person failing to comply with or contravening (he provisions of any rule [shall, on conviction in respect of an ofence not falling under section 7, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or with fne which may extend to fve thousand rupees or with both; and in the case of a continuing ofence, a further fne which may extend to fve hundred rupees for each day during which the ofence continues after conviction for the frst ofence]. [A failure to comply with, or a contravention of the provisions of a rule made under clause (d) of subsection (2) shall be a cognizable ofence within the meaning of the *Code of v of 1898. Criminal Procedure, I898.] (4) The power to make rules under this section shall be subject to the condition of previous publication.] [(5) All rules made under this section shall be laid for not less than thirty days before each House of the State Legislature as soon as possible after they are made, and shall be subject to such modifcations as the State Legislature may make, during the sessions in which they are so laid or the session immediately following, and publish in the Ofcial Gazette] Note:- 'Before we proceed to construe sub-section (5) of sec. 9 of the Act, it is necessary to notice provisions of Sec. 24 of the Bombay General Clauses Act, 1904 Sec. 24 of the Bombay General Clauses Act enacts provisions which are necessary to be followed when the power to make rules is subject to the condition of previous publication. Clause (a) of the said sec. 24 requires the rule making authority to publish the draft of the proposed rules for the information of person likely to be afected thereby. Clause (b) requires the publication of the draft rules in the manner prescribed by the State Government or the Central Government if the condition with respect to previous publication so requires or otherwise as the rule making authority may deem sufcient. Clause (c) requires the date to be specifed in the draft rules after which the draft would be taken into consideration for fnalizing the rules. Clause (d) then provides for consideration of objections or suggestions made by the persons who are likely to be afected or made by the authority whose sanction, approval or concurrence is necessary for framing the rules. Clause (e) provides that the publication of the rules in the Ofcial Gazette would be conclusive proof that the rule by bye-law has been duly made." In interpreting sec.9 (5) of the Act, the cardinal rule of construction of a statute which need to be borne in mind is that the words of a statute are so be understood in their natural, ordinary or popular sense and the phrases and sentences are to be construed according to their grammatical meaning unless such a construction would lead to some absurdity or unless there is something in the context or in, the object of the statute to suggest the contrary. Lord Brougham observed in Crawford v Spooner (1846) 4 NIA 179(PC) p. 181 that "The true way" is to take the words as the legislature have given them, and to take the meaning which the words given naturally imply, unless where the construction of those words is, either by the preamble or by the context of the words, in question, controlled or altered. The speech by Lord Simion of Claisdale in the case of Suthendran v Immigration Appeal Tribunal, (1976) 3 All ER 611 (HI) p. 616 which is reproduced below gives a golden rule of construction in this regard: "Parliament is prima facie to be credited with meaning what is in an Act of Parliament. The drafting of statutes, so important to a people who hope to live under the rule of law, will never be satisfactory unless Courts seek whenever possible to apply the "golden rule" of construction that is to read the statutory language, grammatically and terminologically, in the ordinary and primary sense which it bears in its context, without omission or addition. Of course, Parliament is to be credited with good sense; so that when such an approach produces injustice, absurdity, contradiction or stultifcation of statutory objective the language may be modifed sufciently to avoid such disadvantages, though no further." (Emphasis supplies) Bearing the above rule of construction in mind, it would be useful to paraphrase the said sub-section (5) in order to gather its requirements:- (a) All rules made under this section shall be laid for not less than thirty days before each House of the State Legislature as soon as possible after they are made, and (b) Shall be subject to each modifcations as the State Legislature may make, during the session in which they are laid or the session immediately following, and (c) Publish in the Ofcial Gazette. In construing the language of the said sub-sec. (5), it is urged on behalf of the petitioner that there is a grammatical error and the word "publish" used there in should be in the past tense i.e., "published" and that it governs the aforesaid clause (a) of sub-sec. (5) so that according to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the requirement in the Ofcial Gazette would come after the rules are laid before the houses. On the other hand, the rival submission is that the expression "publish in the Ofcial Gazette" would in its natural grammatical reading of sub-sec. (5) would go with clause (b). "It is clear that the clause "and published in the Ofcial Gazette" in its grammatical sequence will have to be read with the expression "after they are made" which would mean that the rules are to be laid before the house after they are made and published in the Ofcial Gazette which will clearly run counter to the construction sought to be put on behalf of the petitioner." In our view, the construction sought to be put on Sec. 9 (5) of the Act on behalf of the State as well as the respondent No. 4 appears to be natural and grammatically correct. For the said construction it is not necessary to introduce any correction in the word "public" and to read it in the past tense. According to the said construction the requirement of publication in the Ofcial Gazette would be applicable to the modifcation which the State Legislature may make after the rules are laid before the house, because the relevant part of sub-sec. (5) would then read and shall be subject to such modifcation as the State Legislature may make and publish in the Ofcial Gazette. If as shown above the requirement of publication in the Ofcial Gazette is thus applicable to the modifcations only which the State Legislature may make, then the phraseology under the said sub-sec, that all rules shall be subject to such modifcation's would indicate that the rules made by the State Legislature have come into force already when they are Gazetted by the State Government, as required by Sec. 9 (1) of the Act, particularly when such "laying rules" are held to be directory and not mandatory by the Supreme Court in the case of Jan Mo/id. v State of Gujarat AIR 1966, SC 385 and Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd. v Stale of Haryana AIR 1979, SC 1149. The decision of the Andhra Pradesh in the case of D. K. Krishnan v Secretary, Regional Transport Authority Chitioor AIR 1956 A. P. 129 which is approved by the Supreme Court in the case of Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd, v State of Hayana AIR 1979, SC 1149 fully supports the view taken by us. Neither any material is brought before us nor can it be said that the above construction would lead to some absurdity or is contrary to the object of the Act. There is, therefore, no reason why the said grammatical meaning should not be given to Section 9 (5) of the Act." Pannalal Nemasa Jain v Stale of Maharashtra and others 1987 (2) Born CR 33; Mah LR 1987, 929 Nagpur Bench per H. W. Dhabe J. 10. The State Government [or the Commissioner] may, by order in writing exempt, subject to such conditions and restrictions as it [or he] may impose, any cinematograph exhibition or class of cinematograph exhibitions from any of the provisions of this Act or of any rules made thereunder. 11. The Cine ma tog raph Act, 19)8, in its application to the [pre- Reorganisation State of Bombay] and in so far as it relates to the regulation of exhibition by means of cinematograph (including licensing of places in which cinematograph flms are exhibited), is hereby repealed, [12. On (he commencement of this Act in the Vidarbha and Hyderabad areas of the Stale of Maharashtra to which it is extended by the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) (Extension and Amendment) Act, 1960, the following laws, that is to say,- (i) the Madhya Pradesh Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1952; (ii)!he Hyderabad Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1952; shall stand repealed: Provided that, such repeal shall not afect, - (a) the previous operation of any laws so repealed or anything duly done or sufered thereunder; or (b) any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accured or incurred under any law so repealed; or (c) any penalty incurred in respect of anything done against any law so repealed; and any investigation, proceedings or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability or penalty as aforesaid may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such penalty may be imposed as if the Bombay Cinemas (Regulation) (Extension and Amendment) Act, I960 had not been passed: Provided further that, subject to the preceding proviso, anything done or action taken (including any appointment made, notifcation, order or direction issued, licence granted or rules made) by or under the laws so repealed, shall be deemed to be done or taken under the corresponding provisions of this Act, and shall continue in force accordingly unless and until superseded by anything done or any action taken under thisAct-]