Rabindranath Tagore’s poem, “Where the Mind is Without Fear” offers a timeless prayer to the Almighty to lead his country’s people beyond “narrow domestic walls” into “ever widening thought and action.” As recent political directives use identity and language for building narratives, it is vital to ask: has India truly moved beyond the constraints of political parochialism, or do such policies reveal how far we still have to go?
The Constitution protects both the right to carry on any profession (Article 19(1)(g)) and safeguards cultural and linguistic minorities (Article 29(1)). Therefore, one right cannot trump the other. The Supreme Court has advocated for “linguistic secularism” in the country. Cinema halls, as private businesses, have the autonomy to control the prices of food and tickets they sell, a right affirmed by recent judgments. The state should foster culture by enabling creativity, not by imposing inflexible quotas that force cinema owners to choose between viability and compliance.
A Directive Without Foundation
The West Bengal government’s directive, which has now been revised to mandate a Bengali film screening in the new prime-time slot of 3 PM to 9 PM daily, goes beyond a policy error. This move, framed by Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee as a crucial step to protect “Bengali asmita” (pride) in the face of alleged attacks on Bengalis in BJP-ruled states, fundamentally distorts the statutory purpose of Section 5(3) of the West Bengal Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1954. The Act’s powers are designed for specific, limited public interest contexts to regulate the exhibition of films for educational, scientific, or news purposes. They are not meant to micromanage commercial cinema programming or permanently mandate prime time slots for a specific category of films.
Converting these limited regulatory powers into a tool for a universal, daily cultural quota, which now requires at least one Bengali film screening on each screen every day of the year, which was 120 moviesper year in 2018, infringes on the autonomy of private businesses.
This statutory overreach is unlikely to withstand legal challenge. When similar mandates were contested, such as Maharashtra’s efforts to impose Marathi film screening quotas, courts noted the impracticality and legal concerns of forcing private exhibitors to compromise commercial interests for a state-driven cultural agenda. The Bombay High Court questioned the legality and feasibility of such mandates, favouring “realistic” solutions that respect both constitutional freedoms and business realities. This legal vulnerability explains why the Maharashtra Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1953, and its Rules do not mandate Marathi film screenings. Confronted with strong legal opposition and conflicting business concerns, the state resorted to informal directives and political pressure rather than pursuing new legislation likely to be struck down.
The Path Forward: Enabling, Not Containing
History shows that coercive mandates in cinema rarely work. In Maharashtra, despite a stiff fine of ₹10 lakh, compulsory screening rules failed to revive Marathi cinema. Instead, they harmed traditional single-screen theatres and forced awkward tradeoffs. While the West Bengal government’s move is presented as a measure to protect ‘Bengali asmita,’ it is likely to be similarly ineffective. Market realities often undermine such mandates, as seen in a recent dispute between the Marathi film “Yere Yere Paisa 3” and “Saiyaara,” a popular Hindi movie. This highlighted how such policies alienate both audiences and exhibitors.
Regional cinema’s challenges in Bengal, Maharashtra, and beyond run deeper than scheduling mandates. The post-pandemic OTT surge, limited return on investment, and lack of compelling content pose far greater obstacles. Market-driven successes like Marathi’s “Sairat” and Malayalam’s “Drishyam” prospered through merit, transcending language and inspiring adaptations nationwide. Systemic issues like low screen density, poor infrastructure, and rampant piracy hinder the sector far more than uneven show scheduling.
Though coercive mandates have failed, Maharashtra’s ongoing efforts offer a more promising path. Learning from past pitfalls, the state now seeks to foster Marathi cinema through enabling policies, recently forming a committee to explore subsidies, tax incentives, and streamlined licensing to build a healthier ecosystem. This shift in approach acknowledges that supporting regional cinema through freedom and opportunity, as Tagore envisioned, is the surest way to foster “ever widening thought and action” and nurture a creative ecosystem free from fear and constraint.
Disclaimer: The opinions and views expressed in this article/column are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of South Asian Herald.
