1993 (7) TMI 339 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether video parlors exhibiting pre-recorded cassette of cinematograph films through VCR/VCP fall within the definition of 'cinematograph' under the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the Punjab Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1952.

Analysis:
The judgment in question revolves around the interpretation of whether video parlors showing pre-recorded films through VCR/VCP are considered 'cinematograph' under the relevant Acts. The appellants, running video parlors in Haryana without obtaining the necessary license, contended that VCRs do not constitute 'cinematograph' as defined in the Acts. The High Court rejected this argument, citing a previous Division Bench decision that included VCRs under the definition of 'cinematograph.' Additionally, provisions related to entertainment duty on video shows were deemed irrelevant to the interpretation of 'cinematograph.'

The Cinematograph Act, 1952 defines 'cinematograph' as any apparatus for the representation of running pictures or series of pictures. This definition is mirrored in the Punjab Cinemas (Regulation) Act, 1952. The Division Bench's decision in Deep Snack Bar case and similar rulings from other High Courts supported the inclusion of VCRs under this broad definition. The Supreme Court agreed with this interpretation, stating that the definition should encompass modern technological advancements like VCRs, developed in the 1970s, which serve the same purpose as traditional media for exhibiting moving pictures.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, affirming that VCR/VCP fall within the ambit of the 'cinematograph' definition in the Acts. The appellants were instructed to obtain the necessary license to operate video parlors legally. The appeals were dismissed without costs, concluding the matter.