The CAG has flagged "inordinate delays" in issuance of certificates, altering of films for examination by panels without assigning reasons and converting of certified films from A to UA/U category in a report tabled today in Parliament on the functioning of the Censor Board.
The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) said as per the rules the stages of certification by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) should take upto 68 days.
The national auditor noted that all films should be certified on first-come-first-serve basis, though the Regional Officer (RO) has discretionary powers to alter the order if a written request from an applicant is received and the RO feels there are grounds for an early examination.
The CAG said its scrutiny of 175 records from April 1, 2013, revealed that 57 films (32.57 per cent) which jumped the queue, letters from applicants requesting for special consideration or RO's justification were not found on records.
A 'Clear U/UA' or a 'Clear A' certification was done for 135 films, but in cases of 49 films (36 per cent), despite the completion of certification process, time taken for issuance of certificates ranged between 3 and 491 days, it said.
No reasons for delay, after approval of clear certificate by the Examining Committee (EC), were found on record.
Further, in 31 cases between 2013-14 and 2014-15, time taken to certify the film ranged between 75 days and 491 days - and an average of 169 days.
"The reasons for delay were not seen recorded on the file," the CAG said in its report.
"CBFC took inordinately long time in issue of certificates to the applicants, despite completion of the certification process. It also altered the order of films for examination by the Committee without recording any reasons and converted the certified films from A to UA/U without any provision in the Act," it said.
The CBFC issued certificates to the applicant for public exhibition of video films imported into India, without obtaining essential documents and permission, it said.
"There was a lack of internal control within the CBFC for tracking the records of film certification which carried a risk of issue of duplicate certificates for the same film to different individuals not holding copyrights,"the report said.
There is no provision in the Cinematograph Act, 1952, regarding the process of conversion of films from 'A' to 'UA/U', the CAG said adding CBFC has converted 172 'A' category certified films into 'UA' category and 166 films of 'UA' category to 'U' category films during 2012-15.
In reply, the I&B ministry said that there is no specific
provision which prohibits recertification of films already certified, which the auditor said was not "tenable".
The audit specifically took note of a case under which an investigation conducted in 2012 "in respect of V K Chawak, Secretary to Chairperson for the period from January 2009 to December 2009 was found guilty of fabrication of documents and favouritism by the investigation officer appointed as per report approved by the vigilance officer in November 2012."
"She was found guilty of issue of certificates to 2 films which were earlier rejected by the EC," the report said.
It added that the the vigilance wing of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting advised that the official should be prosecuted for major penalty proceedings by the CBFC.
"The decision on the advice from the vigilance wing of the ministry had not been taken till April 2015 and only after audit observation was issued, a major penalty proceeding against the official has been initiated and the official was put under suspension in October 2015," the report said.
The CAG audit also said that CBFC issued certificates to the applicants for public exhibition of video films imported into India without obtaining a certified copy of the imported license and custom clearance permit.
The audit noted that CBFC had accepted films for which certificates were already issued earlier. CBFC could not verify whether a film was certified earlier by them or any other regional office and hence probability of two or more certificates being issued for the same films existed, it said.
"CBFC took inordinately long time in issue of certificates to the applicants, despite completion of certification process. It also altered the order of films for examination by the Committee without recording any reasons and converted the certified films from A to UA/U without any provision in the Act," the CAG said in its report.
It added that the CBFC issued certificates to the applicant for public exhibition of video films imported into India, without obtaining essential documents and permission.
"There was a lack of internal control within the CBFC for tracking the records of film certification which carried a risk of issue of duplicate certificates for the same film to different individuals not holding copyrights," the auditor added.
