MUMBAI: The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has directed the makers of Phule—a biopic on social reformers Mahatma Jyotiba Phule and Savitribai Phule—to remove several caste-related terms, following objections raised by Brahmin community associations.
The film, directed by Ananth Mahadevan and starring Pratik Gandhi and Patralekha in the lead roles, was initially scheduled to release on April 11, 2025, to mark Mahatma Phule’s birth anniversary. However, following the controversy, the release has been rescheduled to April 21.
The CBFC's directive includes the removal of terms such as ‘Mahar’, ‘Mang’, ‘Peshvai’, and ‘Manu’s system of caste’, which are considered 'sensitive'. The move comes after the Brahmin Federation, led by President Anand Dave, alleged that the film promotes casteism and portrays Brahmins in a negative light.
Dave argued that while the film highlights caste-based discrimination, it ignores the contributions of Brahmins who supported Mahatma Phule’s reform efforts. “The story is one-sided. We are not against showing the truth, but it should be inclusive. The film could stoke caste-based tensions,” he said.
Reacting to the objection, Nationalist Congress Party (SP) MLA and former minister Jitendra Awhad said on social media, “History cannot be erased, it can only be learned from. Whatever is shown in the movie Mahatma Jyotirao Phule is a historical truth—truth cannot be denied or altered. Among the social reformers of this country, the names of Mahatma Phule and Savitribai Phule stand at the forefront. What is true must be shown.”
Awhad added that those who supported Phules should certainly be acknowledged, but removing key historical facts would defeat the purpose of the film. “Filmmakers must not bow to pressure. Society moves forward by accepting and learning from the mistakes of history,” he said.
Director Ananth Mahadevan also responded to the controversy, defending the film's content. He said the biopic was made after extensive research, drawing from multiple books and historical sources. Mahadevan maintained that, like all filmmakers, he had exercised cinematic liberty, but ensured that the portrayal remained true to historical facts.
