Right to Entertain and Be Entertained: Cinema’s Place in India’s Free Speech Framework under article 19(1) (a)

Abstract

Cinema in India holds a vital place within the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a). This freedom includes protection of the filmmaker’s right to create along with the audience’s right to have access to these diverse perspectives. However, this freedom operates within a legislative limit shaped by the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). The challenge lies in maintaining a clear distinction between necessary regulation for public interest and unjustified censorship that limits creative expression.

With the rise of digital platforms, the concept of Cinema has expanded to include streaming services, online short films, and immersive experiences. Legal frameworks must evolve to address these new forms without restricting innovation. A shift towards transparent, classification-based systems, coupled with public awareness of free speech rights, can ensure that cinema continues to be democratic and inspires change.

Main Blog

In a democracy as vibrant and diverse as our nation, India, the right to express is not merely a privilege but the very soul of the republic. Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees to all citizens the right to freedom of speech and expression, a fundamental right that has grown beyond ink and paper to shape our country’s cultural, political, and artistic narratives.

The freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India is a concept that should be looked upon from a number of different angles, not just from the side of the content of expression but also in the pathways in which communication takes place. It is something which has evolved itself with the passing of time and the fast-approaching advances in technology.

It was observed in the case of Ministry of Information & Broadcasting v. Cricket Assn. of Bengal (1995)[1] that the term “expression” under Article 19(1)(a) of Indian Constitution also includes in its purview, the right of an individual to entertain, along with the right of the audience to be entertained. Amongst this collage of expression, cinema stands as powerful catalyst for change in the society, acting as its mirror, and opening doors for imagination.  Cinema, unlike the written word or spoken speech, is an immersive experience. It is a mixture of visuals, dialogue, music, and movement, and altogether these craft narratives that pierces deep into the public’s heart and soul.

The Supreme Court of India has time and again recognised that the freedom of expression is not bound within the limits of spoken speech or written words, but it extends to every form of communication, including films. In Odyssey Communications (P) Ltd. v. Lokvidayan Sanghatana[2], the Supreme Court held that the right of a citizen to exhibit films on the State channel, Doordarshan, is part of the fundamental right guaranteed under Articlen19(1)(a). The court also held that this right is similar to the right of a citizen to publish his or her views in any other form of media like newspaper, magazines, journals, etc.

The phrase “Right to Entertain and be Entertained” breathes life into this constitutional guarantee. It recognises a mutual dialogue, between the creator and the audience, the creator’s right to convey a message and the audience’s right to receive it. This is the very intention of democracy, an active democratic exchange of ideas, stories, assent and dissent, values, and heritage.

Cinema has often been a carrier of social commentary. Filmmakers have always navigated the path through political taboos, social inequalities, and historical mishaps.  Their right to do so is guaranteed in the constitutional freedom of speech and expression. In Phantom Films(P) Ltd. v. Central Board of Film Certification[3], the court emphasised the importance of allowing young filmmakers the freedom to chart out a different and newer approach to social issues.[4]  At the same time, citizens, as the receivers of such art, have the constitutional right to access diverse perspectives, to be provoked, moved, or even be outraged.

But one essential thing to keep in mind is that this right is not without friction. The Cinematograph Act, 1952, and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) operate as some sort of gatekeepers, often blurring the very fine line between regulation and censorship. The state does impose reasonable restrictions “in the interest of sovereignty, decency, or public order,” but such limitations must never get mixed or be misunderstood for instruments of moral policing or political silencing. In K.A. Abbas v. Union of India [5], it was held that in INida, censorship of films by prior restraint is permissible.[6]The tension between artistic freedom and societal sensitivities continues to be a battleground for legislative evolution.

With time, the medium is also evolving, the definition of ‘cinema’ itself is expanding. Today, a short film uploaded on YouTube, a web drama streaming on an OTT platform, or even a virtual reality experience can all fall under the umbrella of cinematic expression. The law must also adapt itself accordingly, ensuring that the new-age storytellers are not suffocated by outdated regulatory frameworks. The recent attempts to bring digital content under censorial oversight create fresh threats to the sensitive balance between regulation and freedom.

As India continues its wrestle with the boundaries of speech, cinema stands at the crossroads of law, art, and politics. It is a space where dissent can also be lyrical, rebellion can be a metaphor, and truth can manifest itself as fiction. To truly uphold the spirit of Article 19(1)(a), the state must not only protect the right to speak through cinema but also the right to be challenged, and even be discomforted by it.

To conclude, the Indian Cinema is not just a mode of storytelling, it is a constitutional expression, protected and nourished by Article19(1)(a). The right to entertain and be entertained is not facetious, it is fundamental. When we protect cinema, we protect not just the artist’s voice, but also the audience’s right to listen, reflect, and be transformed. The screen is not just a backdrop, it is a battlefield, a classroom, and a sanctuary. Protecting cinema and its freedom, we protect the very heartbeat of Indian democracy.

Author:– Shriya Mukherjee,  in case of any queries please contact/write back to us at support@ipandlegalfilings.com or   IP & Legal Filing.

[1] Ministry of Information & Broadcasting v. Cricket Assn. of Bengal (1995) 2 SCC 161.

[2] (1988) 3 SCC 410.

[3] 2016 SCC OnLine Bom 3862.

[4] Facets of Media Law by Madhavi Goradia Divan.

[5] (1970) 2 SCC 780

[6] Facets of Media Law by Madhavi Goradia Divan.