Full Breakdown
NALSAR Students Hold Unauthorized Screening of Umar Khalid Documentary
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event: Student-Only Screening Defies Campus Restrictions
On September 23, a group of students at NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad, organised a private, student-only showing of *Prisoner No. 626710 is Present*, a 60-minute documentary directed by Lalit Vachani about activist Umar Khalid. Approximately 30 to 40 participants attended, sheltering from rain under umbrellas and a roofed area.
Background & Context
Umar Khalid, arrested in September 2020 under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, has been linked by authorities to the February 2020 Delhi riots. Earlier attempts to screen the film at other institutions were blocked. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) warned on September 17 that public exhibition of an uncertified film would breach the Cinematograph Act unless an exemption is granted. A proposed screening at IIIT-Hyderabad on September 18 was cancelled after the CBFC’s notice, and a similar effort at NLSIU was postponed and then cancelled following threats of criminal action.
Timeline
- September 17 – CBFC states that screening an uncertified film would violate the Cinematograph Act without an exemption.
- September 18 – ‘No Tyrants, No Silence’ platform proposes a screening at IIIT-H, drawing CBFC objections.
- September 19 – ABVP Bengaluru claims the NLSIU screening has been cancelled.
- September 23 – NALSAR students hold an unsanctioned private screening of the documentary.
- September 25 – ABVP Telangana publicly opposes the NALSAR screening and calls for action against participants.
Data & Statistics
- Attendance: 30–40 students.
- Runtime: 60 minutes.
- Legal references cited by organizers: Cinematograph Act (exemption argument) and Copyright Act, Section 52(1)J (education-purpose defence).
Official Statements & Responses
- NALSAR Vice-Chancellor Prof Srikrishna Deva Rao affirmed that the university did not authorise the screening.
- CBFC reiterated that any public exhibition of an uncertified film contravenes the Cinematograph Act unless a specific exemption is obtained.
- Student organizer Chinnasamy argued that the private nature of the event placed it outside the scope of the Cinematograph Act.
Criticism & Opposition
The Telangana unit of the ABVP condemned the screening, labeling Khalid “anti-national” and accusing him of supporting “Free Kashmir” and “anti-India slogans.” ABVP officials demanded disciplinary action against participants.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
- Permission status: Students say the event was deliberately unauthorised to avoid denial, while the university and ABVP assert it proceeded without any CBFC exemption. No exemption has been presented.
- Legal interpretation: Organizers cite Section 52(1)J of the Copyright Act to justify the private, educational nature of the screening; the CBFC maintains that the Cinematograph Act still applies to any public exhibition of uncertified material. The legal standing of the event remains unresolved.
