I&B Ministry
Benegal Committee on film certification invites public views within guidelines’ ambit
NEW DELHI: The Shyan Benegal Committee examining the certification process followed by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) set up early this month has sought the views and suggestions of the public in this regard.
While noting that the views should be restricted to two pages covering all important aspects, the notice on the Information and Broadcasting Ministry website says the comments must be “within the ambit of the existing Act, Rules and guidelines, which have withstood the scrutiny of various Courts.”
The comments may be forwarded to NFDC to rajani@nfdcindia.com.
The notice also gives the terms of reference of the Committee and says the guidelines are expected to provide aholistic interpretation of the provisions of the Cinematograph Act and the Rules.The present guidelines have also been reproduced in the notice.
The other Members of the Committee include filmmaker Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra, creative director Piyush Pandey, media veteran Bhawana Somayya, NFDC MD Nina Lath Gupta and Joint Secretary (Films) Sanjay Murthy as Member Convenor. The Committee has been requested to submit its recommendations within two months.
Interestingly, although media reports had indicated that Gautam Ghose and Kamal Haasan had been included as members at the request of Benegal, the notice on the Ministry website makes no mention of this.
When setting up the Committee in later in a meeting with I&B Minister Arun Jaitley, Minister of State Rajyavardhan Rathore and Secretary Sunil Arora, it had been stated that the aim was to suggest a paradigm that ensures that artistic creativity and freedom do not get stifled/curtailed even as films are certified.
Noting that “in most countries of the world there is a mechanism/process of certifying feature films and documentaries,” an official release had also said that the attempt should also be that “the people tasked with the work of certification understand these nuances.”
The recommendations of this Committee are expected to provide a holistic framework and enable those tasked with the work of certification of films to discharge their responsibilities keeping in view this framework.
During their deliberations, the Committee would be expected to take note of the best practices in various parts of the world, especially where the film industry is given sufficient and adequate space for creative and aesthetic expression.
The Committee would recommend broad guidelines / procedures under the provisions of the Cinematograph Act 1952 / Rules for the benefit of the chairperson and other members of the Screening Committee. The staffing pattern of Central Board of Film Certification would also be looked into in an effort to recommend a framework which would provide efficient / transparent user friendly services.
This is not the first time that such a committee has been set up. After earlier attempts, the last Committee that examined similar issues was headed by the eminent Mukul Mudgal. However, no action has been taken on that report submitted in 2013.
I&B Ministry
India turns up the heat on piracy, orders Telegram to axe 3,142 channels and blocks 800 websites
New legal teeth, nodal officers and notices to intermediaries signal that the government is done playing nice with copyright thieves
NEW DELHI: India’s war on film piracy just got significantly more aggressive. The government has ordered Telegram to remove 3,142 channels distributing pirated content, blocked access to around 800 websites through internet service providers, and put the full weight of freshly sharpened legislation behind the crackdown. The message from New Delhi is unambiguous: the free ride for copyright thieves is over.
Minister of state for information and broadcasting L. Murugan spelled out the legal architecture to the Lok Sabha on Wednesday. The Cinematograph (Amendment) Act, 2023, he said, now contains specific provisions designed to make piracy a genuinely painful proposition. Sections 6AA and 6AB prohibit unauthorised recording and transmission of films, with violations attracting a minimum of three months’ imprisonment and a fine of Rs 3 lakh. At the upper end, offenders face three years behind bars and fines of up to 5 per cent of a film’s audited gross production cost — a figure that, for a big-budget production, could run into crores.
The legislation also gives the government powers to act against intermediaries hosting infringing content, by notifying them under Section 79(3) of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and compelling takedowns and blocking actions. Under Section 79(3)(b), intermediaries are legally required to remove or disable access to unlawful content upon receiving government notice or court orders. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, add a further layer of obligation, requiring platforms to ensure their services are not used to host or distribute content that violates copyright or proprietary rights.
To put enforcement into practice, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has established a dedicated institutional mechanism, complete with nodal officers to receive complaints. Copyright holders, authorised representatives or individuals can report piracy through a prescribed format, after which the government issues notices to intermediaries to disable access to infringing links.
The most headline-grabbing action came on 11 March 2026, when Telegram was formally notified under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act and directed to remove and disable 3,142 channels found to be distributing unauthorised content belonging to OTT platforms, content owners and producers. The complaints that triggered the action came from OTT platforms including JioCinema and Amazon Prime Video, which alleged that copyrighted films, web series and other material were being shared on the platform on a massive scale. Telegram’s architecture, with its large file-sharing limits and capacity for user anonymity, has made it a favoured vehicle for exactly this kind of large-scale piracy.
The Telegram action sits within a broader pattern of escalating enforcement. Just days before the Lok Sabha statement, the ministry banned five OTT platforms for streaming obscene content: MoodXVIP, Koyal Playpro, Digi Movieplex, Feel and Jugnu. In July 2025, the Centre ordered the blocking of 25 OTT platforms accused of streaming obscene, vulgar or pornographic material, a list that included ALTT, ULLU, Big Shots App, Desiflix, Boomex, Navarasa Lite, Gulab App, Kangan App, Bull App, Jalva App, ShowHit, Wow Entertainment, Look Entertainment, Hitprime, Feneo, ShowX, Sol Talkies, Adda TV, HotX VIP, Hulchul App, MoodX, NeonX VIP, Fugi, Mojflix and Triflicks.
Rule 3(1)(b) of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, provides the regulatory hook for those actions, prohibiting platforms from hosting content that is obscene, pornographic, invasive of privacy, gender-harassing, racially or ethnically objectionable, or that promotes hatred and violence.
For an industry that loses billions of rupees annually to piracy, the direction of travel is welcome. The question, as always, is not whether the laws exist, but whether the enforcement machinery can keep pace with the ingenuity of those determined to circumvent it. Three thousand channels down, and the pirates are already busy opening three thousand more.
