Not for me or you to decide if song is right or wrong: Javed Akhtar on 'Besharam Rang' row
Mumbai (PTI): Amid reports that the CBFC has asked the makers of Shah Rukh Khan-starrer "Pathaan" to make changes to the shots used in its song Besharam Rang', lyricist-writer Javed Akhtar has said filmmakers need to have "trust" in the film certification body that has the authority to decide what will and what will not make the final cut.
His comments came a day before the trailer launch of "Pathaan", a high-octane spy thriller directed by Siddharth Anand.
Referring to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) as a "department" under the central government", the 77-year-old industry veteran on Monday said, "It is not for me or you to decide whether the song is right or wrong. We have an agency.
"There are people from the government and a cross-section of the society watch the film and decide what will be passed and what will not be passed.
"I think we should have trust in that certification, the cuts that they suggest and what they pass," Akhtar said.
According to reports, the CBFC suggested the film's production banner Yash Raj Films to make changes to Besharam Rang' and remove all the mentions of the Indian intelligence agency RAW and Prime Minister's Office from the movie, scheduled to be released on January 25.
Featuring leading lady Deepika Padukone in a saffron bikini, 'Besharam Rang' has found itself in the centre of a proverbial storm for allegedly hurting religious sentiments.
Protests in several parts of the country have been held against the song.
Last week, posters of "Pathaan" were vandalised in a mall in Ahmedabad and members of the VHP and Bajrang Dal stated they would not allow the screening of the movie in Gujarat unless their issues over the song were resolved.
Asked to comment on how fringe elements were protesting against the film, Akhtar disagreed saying it was not the fringe but politicians who had expressed their disappointment over the song.
"There are no fringe elements, the ministers are talking these things. Forget about the fringe elements. The Madhya Pradesh home minister has said it," he added.
Last month, Madhya Pradesh Home Minister Narottam Mishra took objection to Padukone's costume in the "Besharam Rang" and had said if certain scenes are not "corrected", the government will consider what to do about its screening in the state.
The Madhya Pradesh Ulema Board had also sought a ban on the film for "misrepresenting Islam".
"If he (the minister) thinks there should be a separate censor board for Madhya Pradesh, they (should) watch the film separately. And if they are unhappy with the Centre's film certification, we should not come in between them, it is between them and the Centre," Akhtar further said.
Asked about the recently constituted 'Dharma Censor Board', the screenwriter said every 'dharma' (religion) should have its own censor board.
"There is one censor board in MP, then this is there and one censor board of the centre is also there. What is the problem? We have four-five important 'dharmas' and they should have their censors. Maybe then moulvis (under Islam) will start watching films. Do it, do it!" he quipped.
Akhtar was speaking on the sidelines of the launch of "Jadunama", a coffee table book that draws its title from his nickname (Jadu).
A compilation of extracts from Akhtar's public speeches, interviews and quotes, "Jadunama" was unveiled by his close friend and veteran poet-lyricist Gulzar.
Akhtar's family members, including actor-wife Shabana Azmi, actor-filmmaker-son Farhan Akhtar, director-daughter Zoya Akhtar, actor Tabu, filmmaker Farah Khan, actor Nandita Das, directors Rajkumar Hirani and Ashutosh Gowarikar, and actors Deepti Naval, Divya Dutta, Urmila Matondkar, Saiyami Kher, and Satish Kaushik attended the event.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
