Film Industry: Finance and Government Policy

Chapter - IV Film Industry: Finance and Government Policy This Chapter deals with some basic aspects, mainly the finance and the Government policy, which affected the film industry directly and, therefore, it is sub-divided into two parts; (a) Finance (b) Government Policy. (A) Finance As capital is the basic need of any industry, so it is true with the films also. In fact, money is the sole criterion of this industry which called for large funds and investments. -Making a movie is impossible without an assured finance. Given the nature of the large infrastructure, sophisticated equipment and heavy production cost, film requires huge capital investment. How the producers arranged for the finance, on what terms and conditions, how did they meet the expenditure on various heads in producing a movie, the total cost of the production of movie, the return on the box office etc. are some of the essential factors one has to dvelve on while reconstructing this theme. However, given the nature of the theme, authentic and credible sources are difficult to come by. In fact, not much 162

information is available on this aspect According to some sources, the producers maintained the accounts in private diaries, however, this researcher could not gain any access to any such diaries. Therefore, the said sub-chapter on finance is reconstructed with the * t information gleaned through newspapers, biographies and personal interviews., The technology employed for film production was indeed very costly. It called in for substantial, investment in: (a) Equipments, (b), Raw stock, (c) Studio, '(d) Processing, (e) Promotion, (f) Remunerations of artists and technicians, (g) Costumes and settings (h) Censor fee, etc. The first two, sophisticated investment and raw stock presented special problems for the producers. They were not easily available in the market and the cost of their import was very high. Sophisticated Equipments: Camera Camera topped the list of imported equipments as it was not manufacturing in this country. A reference is already made to Savedada had paid 21 guineas (former gold coin ) for cine camera, manufactured by Ralley Brothers of Brand Field, in 1898. Next, he 163

bought a Lumier camera, a three-in-one piece meant for shooting, processing and exhibiting at a cost of Rs.650/- in 1902. It is said to be the oldest camera in India.1 Painter Brothers of Kolhapur purchased a secondhand camera of Williamson Company costing Rs.1000/- in 1913. Maharashtra Film Company purchased a new Bell and Hovel camera for Rs.7000/- in the year 1920. 2 According to Vasant Shinde, a cameraman, the cost standard camera cost rose from Rs.25,000/- in 1940s, the price increased to Rs.40,000/- in 1950s and it was about Rs.60-65,000/- by 1960s. 3 Raw Stock Film reels, usually called raw stock in film language, formed a head of expenditure as the material was imported. Many times takes and retakes at shooting consumed film reel in large length. Famous director Mehboob, often blamed for the wastage of the reels, defended the practice on the grounds of realism and perfection in the art. For any good director the message, film passes, matters, not the quantity of film stock that goes waste. His moto is that famous phrase in Hollywood, 'Raw stock is die cheapest thing, important is the effect achieved thereby'.4 The expenditure on the 164

reels was unpredictable. In those days film production was treated more an arena of an art rather than commerce and as such many directors wouldn t give much thought the expenditure involved in the films. It was a right attitude but wastage of film pushed up the budget of films- which the producers had to bear. Though particular about the quality of the films, producers could not neglect the increasing cost and wastage of film reels. For instance, price of a box of one thousand feet film reel rose from Rs.10/- in 1920s, to Rs.18/- in the year 1934-35, touching the figure of Rs.30/- in 1945-46. The war time restrictions on the imports of film reels, skyrocketed their costs. As a result, not a single Marathi movie was produced in the year 1945.5 India imported 20,50,00,000 square feet film at cost of Rs.56, 60,800/- in year 1949. However, with the establishment of a factory of film reels in Mysore, 1,90,00,000 square feet film was * manufactured in 1951. As a result, the film reels were easily 6 accessible, though in terms of prices they continued to be dearer. 165

Studio A studio is must for film production. Maharashtra Film Company, the first Company of Kolhapur, had its own studio in Mangalwar Peth on a piece of land granted to Baburao Painter by Chh.Shahu Maharaj. Prabhat Film Company had its studio, in a rented space at Mangalwar Peth. When the company needed more space for its latest equipments and machinery, it shifted the studio to Q a spacious accommodation taken on rent Kolhapur Cinetone and Shalini Cinetone too had their own studios. Building a studio was a very costly affair. Bhalji Pendharkar paid Rs.2,30,000/- in 1946 to purchase the studio of Kolhapur Cinetone? Therefore, many producers preferred to shoot in a rented studios that would save their capital investment in studios. The studio companies on the other hand got a new source of income by renting out the studio facilities to such film companies. Kolhapur Cinetone on having closeddown the production of the films, it offered its studio facilities to other companies. For instance, in 1941, Navyug Chitrapat Limited used that studio to shoot its film Sarkari Pahune. ; by paying the rent of Rs.3000/- per month.10 166

Similarly, Arad Pictures of Mumbai for Vasantsena in 1942, Navzankar Chitra of Pune for Vandemataram in 1948, used Shalini s studio. The studio rates nearly doubled to Rs.8000/- in 1950s. As most of the studios came to be closed down in Pune by the end of 1950s, many producers turned to Kolhapur to avail themselves of the studio facilities there for film production. More importantly, such facilities in Mumbai were very costly, which the Marathi producers could not afford, which made Kolhapur was-a favorite place for many Marathi film companies. As a result of this demand, the monthly studio rente touched to the figure of Rs.10000/- by 1960.11 i 1 * It is quite clear from the biographies and interviews that unexpected delays and the unscheduled extension of shooting due to unforeseen reasons would push up the studio and shooting expenditures. Here are some of the examples to show how the shooting of film could be delayed. Occasional Problems Besides problems of technical, financial and political nature there utere also other occasional problems which would stall 167

production of films. The occasional problems such as accidents at the time of shooting, delay in royal assistance, eruption of fire and lack of punctuality etc. are discussed here. Accidents Accidents oh the sets involving the! hero or heroine or other artist was am important cause for delay! in shooting. Baburao Pendharkar fell of the speeding hourse while shooting for Kolhapur Cinetone s Vilasi Ishwar in 1925. The injury was so serious that he was actual bed ridden for one month.12 The same actor was involved in the same type of accident while shooting 13 Shilaganache Sona by Prabhakar Pictures. The -shooting of Swarajyachaya Simevar was delayed by a month because Dilip, playing role of villain fell in the well from the he%#of 40-50 feet.14 Delay in Royal Assistance Film producers did receive patronage from royal court of Kolhapur. Following example helpjunderstand the nature of factors causing unexpected delays. Many producers would use the animals from the Royal stable or articles from Royal palace. For creating sets 168

for the historical movies often they would not receive these thing in time. As a result, they would loose shooting hours. V. Shantaram requested for some cows from Royal palace. Royal permission came only after the film was completed. For those particular shots the producers had to bring the cows from Jat.15 Accidental Fire Occasional fires in film studios often caused serious problems for film production. Maharashtra Film Company lost the prints of Sairandhri, Vastsala Haran and Damaji, and half of the footage of film Markundeya 1922 in fire in godown on the 6th 16 November. As a result, the last film was not produced. A mention is already made to burning of Jayprabha studio on the 31st January 1948 by the enraged mob reacting to the news of Mahatma Gandhi s assassination. Studio suffered heavy losses. The film under production, Mith Bhakar was fully burnt in this mishap. 17 Bhalji Pendharkar had to reshoot the entire film. Property department of Kolhapur Cinetone, a production studio of Prabhkar Pictures, went ablaze on the 9th May 1943. Precious silk curtains and carpets were damaged. 18 169

Lack of Punctuality Lack of punctuality on part of various artists in the film disturbed shooting schedule. So much so that some films had to pack up due to such delays. Bhalji Pendharkar cancelled the production of film Jina Sikho in 1944 when the cast failed to follow the shooting schedule.19 Processing The producers had to spend much on account of processing of the films. It was costly because of the scarcity of vital chemicals and chemical processing laboratories. So, many producers had to send their film for processing to the processing laboratories in Mumbai. The sole exception was Baburao Painter who would process his 20 films. V.Shantaram went to Germany for processing Sairandhri. Processing would cost Rs.3000/- for twelve prints in the 1930s. Two decades later, during 1955-56, the cost of film processing had risen 21 to Rs.5000/- for twelve prints. Promotion of Films Making a film was one thing and turning it into a success was another, for which the producer had to depend on imaginative 170

and effective publicity, which again dented his purse. Baburao Painter was the first producer to introduce huge colorful posters for the publicity of his films. Maharashtra Film Company initially used booklets to publicize its films. The booklets made of folded papers, carried the story line (silent movies) arid other details in four languages: Marathi, Hindi, English and Gujarathi. Such booklets 23 which would cost ten paise in 1930s were distributed freely. The rate of front page advertisement in Pudhari was Rs. 8 /- in 1949. 24 The rate for pre inch Rs. 1/- rose to Rs 2/- in the. year 1960. Similarly, the radio advertisment would cost Rs.600/- in 1960. 25 Besides, producers had to spend on costumes, decorations and other miscellaneous things. In 1929-30, it would cost for about Rs. 1000/- per film. A Pagadiwala (cap merchant) was paid Rs. 40/- per film. For hiring a stud the producer had to pay Rs. 40 /- and Rs. 12/- in addition for the fodder. The daily wages of carpenter and 26 coolie in those days were Rs. 1/- and 75 paise respectively. The 27 expenses on those heads nearly doubled in 1940s. 171

Remuneration of Artists and Technicians Remuneration of artists and technicians accounted for the major expenses in the making of films. In the beginning, many worked in the multiple capacities such as director, artist, screenplay writer, script writer, song writer, musician, technician, etc. However, with the passage of time, specialists took over in almost all branches of film making and expenditure on them rose steadily. In the beginning, many artists worked free. The producer had to provide them lunch and dinners during shooting.28 Maharashtra Film Company provided only the meals to die artists and technicians in 1920. However, once it started making profits, it started paying its artists and technicians. But there was no fix rule about the payments. Baburao Pendharkar, a manager-cumactor, was paid Rs.15/- per month in 1922. Anusayabai and Gulabbai, the first batch of the heroines, would make Rs.20/- per month in the beginning and Rs.50/- by 1927. Balasaheb Yadav, on the other hand, jumped from Rs.20/- in 1921 to Rs.100/- in 1927. Similarly, Zunzarrao Powar's remuneration rose from Rs.15/- in the beginning to Rs.50/- in 1926. In the same year, Anna Gune, a cameraman and technician, was paid of Rs.400/- every month. 172

Vishnupant Damale and Sahebmama Fattelal were paid Rs.250/- and Rs.200/- respectively, for direction and other technical assistance.. V.Shantaram began his film career on a salary of Rs.130/-. i 29 Prabhat Film Company paid Rs.20/- per month to the heroine of Gopalkrishna in 1920s. Anant Mane, a famous director who joined Prabhat Film Company as a technical assistant in 1930, had to work without remuneration for one and half year before he was appointed as a salaried technician on the payment of Rs.10/- which rose to Rs.19/- in 1933 and then to Rs.30/- in 1935. Besides having their own salaried staff, some companies would invite popular artists and technicians to work in their film. Maharashtra film company, for instance, offered the role of Rani Rupmati to Sulochana (Ruby Myers) from Mumbai in 1931 and paid her Rs.2000/-, which was a huge sum then. Prabhat Film Company for its first talkie Ayodhyecha Raja signed Durga Khote for the role of Taramati on a hefty sum of Rs.2500/-. The price of gold was Rs.60/- per ten grams.31 Baburao Pendharkar demanded Rs. 10,000/-for the role of Kallu Berad in Jay Malhar in 1947. The fees, Baburao Pendharkar charged rose from Rs.15/- in 1921 to Rs.30,(XX)/- in 1950 which is indicative of the rising popularity of the artis-ts and 173

emergence of star system which also pushed up the cost of the production of films.32 Even the pro-reta system made the production expensive. If the producer failed to complete the shooting in time, artists and technicians could ask for extra money. Due to the death of Master Vinayak in 1947, his film Mandir could not be completed. Dinkar i Patil took over the charge of direction. Shanta Apte demanded Rs.3,000/- per day as pro-reta,so did Shahu Modak.33 r Rising Production Cost The cost of production of the film rose proportionately to the rise of expenditure on various heads discussed above. Maharashtra Film Company produced its maiden venture Sairandhri with the capital of Rs.10,000/- in 1920.34 By mid-1920s, the production cost rose to Rs.25,000/- With, the emergence of talkies and the advanced technology, film-making cost nearly doubled.35 The average production cost rose from Rs.50,000/- in 1940s to Rs. 1,00,000/- in 50s. In 1953 Bal Gajbar spent Rs. 1,2QOOO/- on 174

36 Muke lekaru. A black and white film would cost approximately between Rs.1,50,000/- to Rs.2,00,000/- by 1960. 37 However, production cost of the film differed from producer, to producer, depending on various factors, like star cast, shooting locations and quality of production equipment When the average production cost during 1960s ranged between one and half to two lakh rupees Namdeorao Vatkar produced a film at the cost of Rs.75,000/. 38 Nature of Capital Investment Film production being an expensive and -the risky venture, it was rather difficult for an individual to make the entire investment in it. One had to look for the partners or financiers to raise the necessary finance. However, getting a fmancer was also a difficult task, since nobody could be certain of assured returns from investment made in film production, as the commercial success of film was often a matter of lubk. However, the history of film industry of Kolhapur is dotted with the names of many who looked upon the films as an adventure and risked their own fortune. For instance, D.G.Vankudre pumped in his own money in Samrat 175

39 Cinetone and produced a film Naganand in 1935. Lata Mangeshkar, a well-known singer, ventured in the film production with her own Surel Chitra banner in 1953 and gave such excellent films as Kanchanganga, Shikleli Bayako and Kanyadan. 40 Chh.Rajaram Maharaj and Akk^saheb Maharaj of Kolhapur t put their own financial resources to the tune of Rs.10 lakh to Rs.12 i lakh to Kolhapur Cinetone and Shalini Cinetone to help Kolhapur film industry.41, The Partnerships However, the general trend of raising finance for film production, barring the exceptions mentioned above, was by way of entering into partnership deeds. Maharashtra Film Company, the - i first one in Kolhapur, had Tanibai Kagalkar, a singer, as a partner, who had invested Rs.10,000/-. Shankarrao Nesarikar, son of a landlord, was next to join it with his investment of Rs.12,000/-. " 1 Prabhat Film Company, launched in 1.929, had four partners, 1 V.Shantaram, Damale, Fattelal and Dhaibar. When the company needed funds, Sitarampant Kulkami joined it as the fifth partner. 176

Namdeo Vatkar with six others, each contributing Rs.4,000/- each, launched Chitrarang Production in 1956.43 A contract system of film production was also prevalent at the time. D.G.Vankundre of Samrat Cinetone assigned a contract worth Rs.1,50,000/- to Shri. K.P.Bhave, a technician and director, for producing five films. Ironically, the contract could not reach its final output due to differences between the producer and financier. 44 Financing through Moneylenders Professional moneylenders turned to the films for quick and high returns. Chandulal Shaha, a financier-tumed-producer, financed Hans Pictures for the production of film Chaya by paying it 45 Rs.15,000/- in three equal installments, in 1936. Similarly, Manildal Chunilal financed Bhalji Pendharkar's Hindi film Maharathi Kama in 1944.46 Distributors Another source tapped for raising the necessary capital in the production of the film was the distributor of the film. The producers would receive the necessary advance from the distributor against the distribution rights of the film in the making. If the film failed, the 177

producer would bear the loss, or the producer would receive the advance from the distributor on the condition of minimum guaranteed returns, with fifty per cent share in the profits. However, the popular arrangement between the producer and the distributor was the one that involved outright sale to the distributors, in which the producers had no share in the profits made by the distributor and the exhibitor. However, the said arrangement gave security to the producer from being declared insolvent in the event of a huge loss. The sole rights of distribution in 1950s were made on the basis of three different territories known in the film line as 'circuits'. Entire distribution network of Marathi films included 'Mumbai circuit (M.C.), Central Province and Central India (P.I.C.) circuit and south circuit i.e. Marathwada region.47 However, the said system was exploitative, according to many insiders. Dinkar Patil compared the producers with a poor farmer, who toils hard throughout the year, raises good crops, but under the existing exploitative system, is forced to sell his produce very cheap to the agents (known as Adate), who prosper on the commission. However, there were exceptions too. like Bhawarlal Sethi of Ruby Pictures,. the financier of Ram Ram Pahune of Udaykala Chitra. 178

When the said movie became an instant hit and he earned much profit, he was generous enough to offer the director and the producer of the film Dinkar Patil a Cheverolet car, besides some cash in addition to the fixed contract amount. However, film making remained a risky proposition. When the movie failed at the box office, the producer was not alone to suffer the loss, others, too, did. Sethi, the one of financiers of the most ambitious project, Chhatrapati Shivaji of Bhalji Pendharkar, suffered huge losses when the film failed at the box office. So much so that he was forced to shut down his Bombay office.48 Prominent producers and directors in the film industry were aware of the fact thcjfc commercial success of a film did not depend solely on the quality of the film but an effective distribution also had an important role to play in it. Producer Baburao Painter of Maharashtra Film Company had started his own distribution office in Bombay* Kolhapur Cinetone did the same. V.Shantaram established his Silver Screen Exchange distribution company. Baburao Pendharkar started his own distribution company Pearless 49 Pictures in partnership with P.B.Samant in 1936. 179

The 1940s saw the emergence of public limited firms. Hans Pictures converted itself into Navayug Chitrapat Limited. Baburao Pendharkar turned the Navhans Pictures into a limited firm worth rupees twenty five lakh.50 Returns AfiWmaking is basically a commercial endewfwtr involving a chain of producers, theatre owners and distributors. Maharashtra Film Company, for three days exhibition! of Murliwala received j i Rs.100/- and Rs.50/- respectively from Ismail Cinemagrah from the, i theatre owner in Akola in 1927. Next year, the said company for the said film received Rs.100/- from Tajmahal theatre, Gadag and Rs.372/- for another film from Glob Cinemagrah of Ahmednagar. 51 1 i The film companies would pay fixed rent to cinema theatres for exhibiting their films. In some cases, theatre owners gave some percentage of income to the film company. In 1938, cinema theatres gave seventy percent of income to the film company.52 During the era of silent movies (1913-32), the average income from films ranged between rupees fifty and sixty thousand, if the 180

film was successful at the box office. Due to the failure of film 53 NaganandjSamrat Cinetone suffered a heavy loss.. To avoid such losses, outright sale of film became popular practuce. In 1934, Chhatrapati Cinetone sold its film Kurukshtra for rupees forty thousand. Maya Pictures sold its film Mohini for rupees seventy 55 five thousand rupees in 1940. As stated earlier, the system of outright sale and territory-wise rights gained ground gradually. During mid-1950s, the rights of a film for Mumbai territory were sold on an average of rupees thirty to thirty five thousand, it was rupees fifty thousand for Varhad territory and rupees ten thousand for south territory. Namdeorao Vatkar sold the distribution rights of his film for Mumbai territory at rupees thirty thousand in 1957.56 Tickets One can easily establish the popularity of the film by measuring its collection at the box office. The rates of tickets varied from place to place and from time to time. In 1920s, the general rate of film ticket was approximately one anna. After 1920s, different rates were charged for different classes. For example, in 1935, the 181

ticket for 'stall' was two anna and that for 'balcony' was four annas. For special seating arrangement called box' the rate eight annas. For the special seating arrangements for ladies the rate of ticket was four and half annas.57 By the end of the study period, i.e. 1960, the rates for the 'first', 'stall' and box' were Rs.l/-, Rs.1.50 and Rs.2.50, respectively. The; exhibitors had to give seventy per cent of their income to the producers or the distributors. The researcher also found that different rates were existed at different places which increased time to time. According to UvpCwaai Datar and Ramnath Jathar, there was one anna ticket in 1925-26 at Hans talkies, Kolhp^krAs stated by Shyamala Johni, Y.G.Bhosale and Vasant Shinde in 30s the ticket rate rose to two annas. According to Shriram Rathi,the said rate was one anna in the villages or in the small towns even in 1940s. Sharad Vardkar stated that during 1940s the ticket rate was three Annas in Kohapur. The same rate existed in Pune during this period, as stated by G.N.Gogalekar. But as per the information was provided by Arvind Potnis the rate was five annas in Nashik during this period. According to Prof. Laxman Deshpande in the first half of 1950s the ticket rate was twenty five paise in Aurangabad In mid 50s the rate was sixty paise in Kolhapur, as 182

stated by Anandrao Adsul. According to Kiran Shantaram, in 1955-56 the rate was one rupee and twenty five paise in Mumbai. At the end of the period of this study i.e. in 1960 the theatres in Kolhapur charged two rupees and fifty paise for balcony, one rupee and fifty paise for Stall and one rupee for first. In spite of comparatively high admission rates, the number of movie goers who wrote fate of movies and film makers rose steadily. As the number of commercially successful films decreased year after year, failure at the box Office forced several film companies to shut their shutters. For instance, Bhairavi turned out to be last film of Dinkar Chitar. Ironically Bhairavi,is the raga of concert final. (B) Government Policy The Freedom Struggle of India entered a new phase with the dawn of 1920s. Mahatma Gandhi's arrival on India's political horizon and his innovative leadership imparted a fresh momentum and new direction to the freedom movement. Against this backdrop, the rising popularity of films made the British Government rather sensitive to the growing influence and impact of films on the native population. The British were afraid of the native movies being turned into an anti-british propaganda vehicle. Therefore, there was 183

was the economic consideration of mobilizing one more source of 63 income. With an emphasis on the latter, the British came up with the Entertainment Tax Act of 1923, to regulate the collection of entertainment duty from various 'entertainment halls' including cinema theatres. As per the provisions of this Act, owner of each cinema theatre (entertainment hall) would purchase adhesive stamps from the Government treasury. These stamps would be affixed on the tickets for admission to the cinema hall. The theatre owner had to file the return of the stamps purchased and used every fifteen days, failing which the security deposit paid by the theatre owner would be forfeited. The Act covered minute provisions including issue of tickets, defacement of tickets, issue of complimentary tickets, exemption to British and Indian soldiers, purchase of stamps, * 64 etc. Theatres in Kolhapur The history of the cinema theatres in Kolhapur may be traced back to Deccan Cinemagrah of Painter Brothers started in partnership with Vashikar in 1912. It was followed by Maharashtra Cinemagrah and Star Cinema, Capital Chitrapatgrah, Hans Cinema 185

Shivaji Cinema etc. Tayyab Ali built Venus theatre in 1932. More important, he provided free bus ride for die cinegoers from / the city to the theatre. He also started another theatre, Anwar. Subsequently, Rajaram theatre, Royal Chitrapatgrah, Padma theatre, Prabhat theatre and Usha Cinemagrali were established. The number of theatre rose from eight to eleven between 1950 to 65 I960. Theatre owners were burdened with numerous taxes, such as municipal tax (which was Rs.2/- per show in 1940s), water taxes, theatre licence fee, entertainment tax (which amounted to nearly 20 to 25 per cent of the total income), etc. Exhibitors also had to pay between 60 and 70 per cent of the income to the distributors.66 Entertainment tax attracted the ire of film producers and exhibitors alike. Many cojvtknned it as discriminatory taxation. Ganpatrao Deshmukh, MLA from Sangola Constituency, criticized the Maharashtra Government for imposing entertainment tax on films which was the source entertainment of common man. He condemned that Government could raise the taxes on horses races fn instead of entertainment tax. During 1960, Union Finance Minister, Moraiji Desai imosed excise duty of fifty paise per meter on film. Representations were made to the Union Finance Minister 186

against it as it hit Marathi film industry very hard but to no avail. \ On the contrary, after thp Chinese aggression, Government increased ' 68 the tax 100 per cent. Censorship and Films Most of the cases where films had suffered at the hands of the censor board very hard belonged to pre-independence era. No such major cases are found in post-independence era. However, the Government of India has retained the same British law. In the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, Sanctioning of cinematographic films or exhibition' has been included in Entry 60 of the Union List and 'Cinemas, subject to the provisions of Entry 60 of List-I in Entry 33 of the State List. Some of the sections of the Cinematograph Act, therefore, concern the Central Government, some the State Governments and others both the Central and the i State Governments. Some sections of the Act were amended in 1949, but only for the introduction of "A" and "U" certificates and centralization of censorship. In the absence of a clear demarcation of the respective provisions of the Act with which the Central and the State Governments are concerned, various difficulties have been 187

arising in the administration of the Act. The purpose of the Act of 1951 was to resolve the confusion by re-enacting the provisions of the Act of 1918, as amended in 1949, by separating the provisions relating to the sanctioning of films for exhibition (a Union subject) from the provisions relating to licensing and regulation of cinemas (a State subject). Some important amendments were made in the Cinematograph Act, from time to time. These were as follows: (i) Under section 3, besides the whole-time Chairman, the Board of Film Censors is to consist of not more than nine members. It is now proposed to increase the membership of the Board from nine to not less than twelve and not more than twentyfive. (ii) Section 4 sets out a twofold classification of films, namely "U" (for unrestricted public exhibition), and "A" (for public exhibition restricted to adults only). The classification was expanded by including therein two more categories, namely "UA" (for unrestricted public exhibition subject to the film being endorsed with the caution to the parents/guardians to satisfy themselves as to whether they would like their children 188

or wards below the age of 12 years to see the said film) and "S" (for public exhibition restricted to, members of any profession or any class of persons having regard to the nature, content and theme of the film). (iii) Section 5B, which incorporated the principles of guidance in certifying films, was amended so as to include therein one more principle, namely, "in the interests of sovereignty and integrity of India". Guidelines for Censorship As per the existing law, principles, for guidance in certifying films are as follows- (1) A film shall not be certified for public exhibition if, in the opinion of the authority competent to grant the certificate, the film or any part of it is against the interest of [the sovereignty and integrity of India] the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign states, public order, decency or morality, or involves defamation or contempt of Court or is likely to incite the commission of any offence. Censorship is permitted mainly on social interest specified under Article 19 (2) of the constitution.with emphasis on values and 189

standards of society. Therefore, the censorship by prior restraint must necessarily be reasonable that could be saved by the well accepted principle of judicial review.69 / As far as the classification of films, "U" and "A" (amendment H to the Cinematograph Act) is concerned, not a single film, out of 102, belonged to "A" category nor "UA" nor "S" category. Most of the films are certified for unrestricted public exhibition. Marathi Film Industry could not get any substantial benefits or special treatment by way of tax relief from State Government even after independence. According to Vasant Sathe, the high expectations of Marathi film world in the wake of establishment of Marathi ligustic state could not materialized.70 Marathi films found it difficult to compete with color Hindi films and tax free Marathi drama. Those adverse factors put the Marathi films on decline. The industry produced hardly fifteen films per year after 1960s. In order to help this ailing Marathi film industry the scheme of tax returns to film producers was declared by Government. This was the result of persuasion by, Marathi Chitrapat Mahamandal, 190

Madhukarrao Choudhari, the then Finance and Cultural Minister of Government of Maharashtra announced this scheme. This gesture from Government came as late as 1975.71 In other words right from its inception 1920 till 1960, the film industry survived and registered growth on its own initiative without much Government support. References 1. Sudhir Phadake (ed.), Chitrasharda, p. 24. 2. G.R.Bhide and Baba Gajbar, Kalamaharshi Baburao Painter, p.133. 3. Interview- Vasant Shinde, Cassette No. 6. 4. Sudhir Phadake, op. tit., p. 37. 5. Interview- Anant Mane, Cassette No. 1. 6. Satyawadi, dated 12January 1952 7. G. R. Bhide and Baba Gajbar, op. cit., p. 83. 8. V. Shantaram, Shantarama, p. 87. 9. Bhal ji Pendharkar, Sadha Manus, p. 164. 10. Pudhari, dated 31 May 1939. 11. Interview- Subhash Bhurake, Cassette No. 7. 191

12. Baburao Pendharkar, Chitra Aani Charitra, p. 120. 13. Ibid.,p. 187. 14. Satyawadi, dated 2 December. 15. V. Shantaram, op. cit., pp. 98,99. 16. G. R. Bhide and Baba Gajbar, op. cit., p.58. 17. Bhal; ji Pendharkar, op. cit., p. 151. 18. Pudhari, dated 15 Mayl943. 19. Interview- Leela Pendharkar, Cassette No. 2. 20. V. Shantaram, op.cit., p. 139. 21. Namdev V atkar, Katha Mazya Janmachi, p. 196. 22. G.R. Bhide and Baba Gajbar; op.cit, p. 91. 23. Interview - Anant Mane, Cassette No. 1. 24. Interview - Subhash Bhurke. 25. Sudhir Phadke, op.cit.,p. 29. 26. G.R. Bhide and Baba Gajbar, op.cit. pp. 175,76. 27. Interview - Anant Mane. 28. Baburao Pendharkar, op.cit., p. 55. 29. Ibid., p. 70. 30. Interview - Anant Mane. 31. V.Shantaram, op.cit., p. 118. 192

32. Baburao Pendharkar, op.cit.,p. 191. 33. Dinkar Patil, Patlacha Por, p. 138. 34. G.R. Bhide and Baba Gajbar, op.cit., p. 53. 35. Baburao Pendharkar, op.cit., p. 56. 36. Interview - Vijay Gajbar, Cassette No.6. 37. Interview - V as ant Shinde. 38. Namdev Wt&ftyv, Op.Cit., P. 204. 39. Interview - Vasant Vankundre. 40. Interview - Y as ant Shinde. 41. Satyawadi,. 4 December 1948, 42. G.R. Bhide and Baba Gajbar, op.cit., p. 164. 43. Namdev Vo.t.&wV, op.cit., p. 181. 44. Interview - Vasant Vankundre. 45. Baburao Pendharkar, op.cit., p. 124. 46. Interview - Leela Pendharkar. 47. Dinkar Patil, op.cit., pp. 152-53. 48. Ibid, P. 168. 49. Baburao Pendharkar, op.cit., p. 119. 50. Ibid, p. 184. 51. G.R. Bhide and Baba Gajbar, op.cit., pp. 175-76. 193

52. Satyawadi, dated 20 August 1938. 53. Interview - Vasant Vankudre. 54. Satyawadi, dated 2 November 1934. 55. Pudhari, dated 18 August 1940. 56. 'Namdev Vatkar, op.cit., p. 204. 57. Satyawadi, dated 21 August1935. 58. Ibid., dated 2 October 1960, 59. Response to questionarie. 60. G.R. Bhide and Baba Gajbar, op.cit., p. 24. 61. Sanjeev Narvekar, Marathi Cinema in Retrospect, p.56. 62. V.Shantaram, op.cit.,p. 108. 63. The Cinematograph Act,1952. 64. Bombay Entertainment Duty Act, 1923, Revenue Department, Sachivalay, Bombay, 13 August 1958. 65. Pudhari,. dated 24 September 2002. 66. Interview - Shriram Rathi, a theatre owner. 67. Bombay Legislative Assembly debates, 6 December 1955, pp.446-47. 68. Isak Mujawar, Maharashtra: Birthplace of Indian Film Industry, p. 118. j 194

69. The Cinematograph Act, 1952. 70. Sudhir Phadke, op.cit.,p.2. 71. Ibid., p! 26. 195