Freedom of expression is slightly more than scribbling poems and tucking them away in your closet, or giving a small, inane speech at a party you might be hosting in your kitchen garden. It is also about putting across a point of view. And it is also about accepting someone else's point of view, however, obnoxious or virulent it might be. The attacks on Biharis, among others, in Mumbai by chauvinist Marathis, and the subsequent display of primeval sentiments by political leaders of Bihari ostensibly as a reaction to the former are both parochial manifestations of divergent points of view. In this backdrop comes a Maharashtra governmental ban on the film called Deshdrohi that purportedly depicts atrocities on North Indians perpetrated by chauvinists in Mumbai, and a Congress leader's call for ban on a play about the Shiv Sena's point of view about the migrants issue in the state capital.

There's some more relief for Shilpa Shetty. The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has quashed criminal cases against Shetty and Reema Sen. The two were accused of having conniving with a Tamil eveninger to publish their obscene pictures. Well, some people get the weirdest of ideas. Justice S Nagamuthu felt the materials available on record did not make out ''any case'' against them. Little wonder. Some details from the NDTV story of April 23. Allowing the proceedings to continue further against the petitioners would be a wasteful exercise involving public money, precious time of the court and amounting to abusing the process of law, the judge said.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered the lifting of bans on the screening of "Jodhaa Akbar", a film about the romance between a Mughal emperor and a Hindu princess that had angered the Rajput community, says a Reuters report. Several states banned the film on the grounds that its screening would incite violence after Rajputs protested and even attacked movie halls screening it. The makers of the film moved the Supreme Court, saying the bans were illegal and had led to huge revenue losses. On Tuesday, the court stayed the bans until March 14 pending disposal of the appeal. Rajput groups say the film, which tells the story of the love and marriage between Akbar, the 16th century Mughal emperor, and the Hindu princess Jodhaa, was historically inaccurate as she was his daughter-in-law. Historians debate this matrimony which is said to have led to an alliance between the Rajputs and the Mughals.

Quite a bunch of Rajputs are irked with Ashutosh Gowarikar's Jodhaa- Akbar. They have raised objections on Jodhaa Bai's origin, as Gowarikar believes. According to Rajputs, Jodhaa Bai was the daughter-in-law of Akbar, and not his wife, as shown in the film. There has been some violence. Says CNN-IBN: "Opposing Ashutosh Gowarikar's movie, hundreds of youths belonging to the Rajput community staged a protest demonstration and shouted slogans against the film producer. They also burnt promotional posters of the film." Gowarikar's depiction may well be a figment of his imagination, than any cinematic expression of though, but there are other ways of protesting than burning posters and demanding bans. If you think Gowarikar is wrong, don't watch it. Or write about it.

The Left cannot be far behind. The Democratic Youth Federation of India (DYFI) on Friday last staged a demonstration in front of a cinema theatre in the Khammam town of Andhra Pradesh protesting against the use of obscene posters, says a siasat.com report. They removed the posters and set them ablaze. The protesters objected to screening of movies replete with obscenity. They attributed the increasing atrocities on girl students in educational institutions to the movies without any commitment towards society and culture.

India should not see Ranbir Kapoor dropping his towel in Saawariya. The Censor Board Film Certification (CBFC) RO Vinayak Azad has this to say according to indiantelevision.com, "I think the issue is being blown out of proportion. It was a voluntary decision by the director Sanjay Leela Bhansali when we explained to him that the scene would not be appropriate for a U-certificate film. He opted to chop it." Yeah, sure, the towel has been blown away, Mr Azad. He has more to say:

We have received a letter from Ranjit Hoskote, Secretary-Treasurer, Drishti Media, Arts & Human Rights, Ahmedabad, on the Mumbai police stopping a screening of Sanjay Kak's documentary. We write to bring to your notice yet another violation of the freedom of expression in India. On Friday, 27 July 2007, a posse of policemen attached to the Dadar police station in Bombay broke into a private screening of Sanjay Kak's documentary, Jashn-e-Azaadi, and confiscated the DVD. The screening, which was hosted by the Vikalp group of independent filmmakers, was intended to bring to a Bombay audience an eloquent cinematic argument for dialogue beyond anguish and antagonism; for an understanding of the 'Kashmir issue' in human and cultural terms.

Sharmila Tagore, our chief film censor, said in an interview with Reuters that state censorship was more transparent and preferable to street censorship enforced by angry mobs or political groups. Here are five recent films that did not have a smooth ride with India's censors — both official and self-appointed: Mumbai Aamchich was denied a certificate this year because the film board said it endorsed the idea that the city of Mumbai belongs only to people from Maharashtra and everybody else should be killed. The Da Vinci Code, a thriller which suggests Jesus Christ had a child with Mary Magdalene, was passed by the film board on the condition it include a disclaimer saying it was fiction. However four Indian states decided to ban the film following protests from Christian groups.

It's Pune again. But this time, it is the turn of the Islamists. A group of youths tore down posters of Hindi film Awarapan and carried out demonstrations at Victory theatre in Pune Camp, where the movie was screened on Saturday afternoon, claiming that the film has scenes hurting religious sentiments. Following the incident, the police provided security to 13 theatres in the city, where the film is being screened in this Maharashtra city. The culprits this time out were members of the Indian Muslim Front, Samajwadi Party, Madina Muslim Committee and others, who ordered the assistant manager of the theatre to stop the screening of the film. Jaladi told the Times of India that during the matinee show about five youths entered the cinema hall and shouted slogans. They demanded that the show must be stopped immediately. "I requested the viewers to leave the theatre. The youths tore down posters pasted in the foyer and the banner outside."

The smaller courts in India are on a roll. Aaah, I know the metaphor doesn't really carry through. But then, what also does not is what these courts are doing by reacting to flippant complaints by a demented section of the public. A local court in Muzaffarnagar has issued summons to Aishwarya Rai and Hrithik Roshan to appear before it on May 30 in connection with a kissing scene in Dhoom-2. District Judge HK Shrivastava ordered issuing of summonses to the duo after taking cognisance of a complaint petition filed by an advocate by the name of Sudhir Kumar Ojha. Ojha had alleged that Rai, Roshan, the film's producer Aditya Chopra and director Sanjay Gardi had hurt the sensibilities of the audiences by the "obscene" kissing scene. Huh.