17-Apr-2025,1:50 PM Renowned filmmaker Anurag Kashyap has once again found himself at the center of a controversy—this time over the film Phule. Known for his outspoken nature and fearless takes on the film industry and censorship, Anurag Kashyap has strongly criticized the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), commonly known as the Censor Board, for its alleged indecisiveness and contradictory stance regarding the certification of the upcoming film Phule.
In a blunt and pointed remark, Kashyap said, “Bhai mil ke decide kar lo”, expressing his frustration over the inconsistent directions from the CBFC. His comment has reignited the long-standing debate about freedom of expression, censorship, and the bureaucratic hurdles faced by filmmakers in India.
What Sparked Anurag Kashyap : Outburst?
Anurag Kashyap :The ‘Phule’ Certification Saga
Phule, a biographical drama inspired by the life of social reformers Jyotirao and Savitribai Phule, has been under scrutiny for its political and social themes. The movie seeks to shed light on caste-based inequalities and the pioneering work of the Phule couple in promoting education and social justice in 19th-century India.
However, when the film was submitted to the Censor Board for certification, the board reportedly returned it with several objections and suggestions for cuts. According to Anurag Kashyap, the directions were vague and contradictory, with different members suggesting different edits, leaving the filmmakers confused and frustrated.
Anurag Kashyap : Explosive Reaction
Taking to social media and addressing media outlets, Anurag Kashyap voiced his anger in characteristic fashion, saying:
“Bhai mil ke decide kar lo. Pehle ek member kuch bolta hai, dusra kuch aur. Filmmakers ko har baar confuse karte ho.”
His comment quickly went viral, drawing support from fellow filmmakers, actors, and free speech advocates who argue that the CBFC’s outdated methods stifle creativity and infringe on artistic liberty.
Anurag Kashyap – No Stranger to Censorship Battles
Anurag Kashyap : History of Conflicts with CBFC
Anurag Kashyap has a long-standing history of locking horns with the Censor Board. From Paanch, which faced a delayed release due to objections, to Udta Punjab, which went through a notorious censorship battle, Kashyap has been an advocate for reforming the certification process.
His films often deal with gritty realism, social issues, and political undertones, making them natural targets for the conservative stance of the CBFC.
Advocate for Artistic Freedom
Beyond directing, Anurag Kashyap has emerged as a leading voice advocating for freedom of expression in cinema. He has frequently participated in panel discussions, interviews, and protests against censorship, calling for the transformation of CBFC from a censoring body to a certifying authority.
In the case of Phule, Kashyap argues that telling the truth about India’s history should not be treated as a threat, and that the film’s message is one of social reform and empowerment.
Censor Board’s Response to the Criticism
CBFC Maintains Neutrality
In response to Anurag Kashyap’s remarks, a senior official from the CBFC stated that the board follows due procedure and provides feedback as per guidelines. The official also mentioned that filmmakers have the right to approach the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) if they are dissatisfied with the board’s decision.
However, critics argue that the lack of transparency and consistency in the CBFC’s decisions often leads to unnecessary delays and confusion, as highlighted in the Phule row.
Questions on Relevance of CBFC Practices
Film critics and social commentators are now questioning whether the current structure of the CBFC is equipped to handle modern, socially-conscious cinema. They point out that subjective interpretations and lack of clear guidelines often lead to arbitrary decisions, something Anurag Kashyap has been vocal about for years.
Support From the Film Fraternity
H3: Filmmakers Rally Behind Kashyap
Following Kashyap’s criticism, many notable names in the industry came forward in support. Directors like Hansal Mehta, Sudhir Mishra, and actors such as Swara Bhaskar and Richa Chadha tweeted in solidarity, stating that the creative space in India is shrinking and needs to be protected.
Some even recalled past incidents where socially and politically relevant films were stalled or edited beyond recognition, leading to self-censorship and creative compromise.
Public Opinion Divided
While a section of the audience supports Anurag Kashyap’s bold stand, others argue that sensitive subjects like caste and politics must be treated with caution. The controversy has sparked a nationwide debate on social media about censorship, freedom of speech, and the role of cinema in shaping public consciousness.
What Is the Film ‘Phule’ About?
Honoring Social Reformers
Phule is a tribute to Jyotirao Phule and Savitribai Phule, pioneers of women’s education and anti-caste activism in India. The film, set in the 19th century, attempts to explore the struggles and revolutionary ideas that challenged the deeply entrenched caste system of the time.
By bringing such stories to mainstream cinema, the film aims to educate and inspire younger generations about India’s lesser-known heroes who shaped its social fabric.
A Bold Narrative in Troubled Times
In the context of rising social polarization, films like Phule take on even greater significance. Anurag Kashyap has stated that the film is a reflection of India’s unfiltered history, one that deserves to be told without interference.
Conclusion
The Anurag Kashyap vs. Censor Board saga over Phule is not just a battle between a filmmaker and an institution—it represents a larger clash of ideologies. On one side stands the creative community advocating for truthful, unfiltered storytelling. On the other, regulatory bodies attempting to balance societal sensitivities with constitutional freedoms.
As the controversy unfolds, one thing is certain—Anurag Kashyap’s voice continues to challenge the system, and in doing so, he forces the country to confront its contradictions about cinema, censorship, and social change.
Source: ANI
