Recently, the Kerala High Court's bench, consisting of Justice N. Nagaresh and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P. has issued notices to the Centre and the producers of the movie 'Kerala Story' in a Writ Petition requesting a stay on its release.
Brief Facts:
In a Writ Petition filed before the Kerala High Court, the petitioner sought a declaration that the 'A' certification issued by the Central Board of Film Certification (“CBFC”) for the movie 'The Kerala Story' is illegal and should be set aside. The petitioner also prayed for interim relief to direct the respondents to stay the release of the movie on 05.05.2023, subject to the result of the writ petition.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The counsel for the Appellant argued that the movie’s teaser has falsely portrayed the conversion and deployment of 32,000 women in a terror mission. The counsel also stated that the trailer depicts events that did not take place and that the release of the movie would lead to communal unrest and disturbing the secular fabric of the State, which is known for its secular outlook.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned Deputy Solicitor General of India (DSGI), Sri. S. Manu appeared on behalf of the official Respondents 1 to 3 and made submissions before the court. He argued that the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) had already granted a certificate for the movie on 24.04.2023, and therefore, there was no need for any interim orders to be passed. Additionally, the learned DSGI cited various court decisions, including Viacom Prakash Jha Productions and another v. Union of India and others [(2011) 8 SCC 372], Viacom 18 Media Private Limited and others v. Union of India and others [2018 (1) SCC 761], Nachiketa Walhekar v. Central Board of Film Certification and another [2018 (1) SCC 778], and the judgment of Kerala High Court in WP(C)No.24767 of 2021, to support his arguments. The learned counsel appearing for the Director of the movie 'The Kerala Story,' made submissions before the court. He argued that the CBFC had already granted a certificate for the movie, and any complaints regarding the teaser made in November 2022 were belated. The learned senior counsel, Sri. S. Sreekumar, appearing for another respondent, also submitted that certification had been granted, and any complaints regarding such certifications could only be entertained by the Board. He further argued that the petitioner, who had not seen the movie, could not make allegations against it based on surmises.
Observation by the Court:
After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, the court decided not to pass any interim orders at this stage. The court noted that the teaser of the movie had been released on 03.11.2022, which was even earlier than the filing of this writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the teaser was released without the permission of the third respondent board. However, the court noted that if that was the petitioner's case, they should have moved the court much earlier, and not when the movie was about to be released on 05.05.2023. The court also observed that the allegations made against the CBFC that the certificate was issued without any application of mind could not be accepted, prima facie, as the certificate itself showed that several modifications, insertions, and excisions were carried out before granting the certificate.
The decision of the Court:
The court noted that without viewing the movie, allegations could not be entertained just based on the teaser at this stage. Therefore, the application was rejected by the bench.
Case Title: Adv Anoop V.R V State of Kerala
Coram: Hon’ble Justice N. Nagaresh and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P
Case No.: Writ Petition (C) No.15036 of 2023
Advocate for the Applicant: M/S. Kaleeswaram Raj, Thulasi K. Raj, Aparna Narayan Menon & Chinnu Maria Antony
Advocate for the Respondent: Sri. S. Manu
Read Order @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
