'May Affect Peace In Society': Orissa High Court Stays Release Of Animated Movie 'Mahaprabhu Jagannath' Ahead Of Rath Yatra
It may shatter the sentiments, emotions and religious beliefs, Court said.
The Orissa High Court on Wednesday (July 15) stayed the release of an animated movie titled 'Mahaprabhu Jagannath', based on certain fictional accounts involving Lord Jagannath, which was slated to be released on July 17 in three different languages.
While directing the producer to temporarily halt the release of the movie, the Division Bench of Chief Justice Harish Tandon and Justice Murahari Sri Raman expressed apprehension about its possible effect on public order, especially when the Rath Yatra is scheduled to be held on July 16. The Bench thus remarked–
“Even if the movie enjoins the guarantee of the freedom of expression and/or speech, but it impacted the thoughts and the action of the common people and, therefore should ensure high degree of attention and retention. At times it creates an immediate influence and at times may shatter the sentiments, the emotions and the religious belief, which cannot be allowed, if it results in unrest in the peaceful society. The motive to release the film may also be one of the facets to be borne in mind at a particular point of time, which may invite an immediate and prompt reaction having cascading effect, that would corrode the fabric resultantly affecting the peace in the society.”
The makers have now approached the Supreme Court, challenging the countrywide ban.
The High Court was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) brought before it by the petitioners, Mahesh Kumar Sahu, Dr. Pramod Kumar Acharya and Umashankar Acharya. Though the matter was not listed on Wednesday, it was taken up for hearing through special listing along with another listed writ petition filed by one Saswat Sahoo.
On 06.06.2026, Ele Animations Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter “the producer”) posted a teaser in the YouTube channel titled 'Jay Jagannath' announcing the release of an animated film “Mahaprabhu Jagannath” on July 10, 2026. Upon release of such teaser, there was widespread dissension as to the contents of the said movie.
Receiving objections from the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration (SJTA), the body responsible for management of the 12th century shrine, the producer had exhibited the film to Puri's Gajapati Maharaja and the members of the SJTA. They raised several objections against depiction of alleged inaccurate stories opposed to the established Jagannath traditions and the spiritual history of the deity. Reportedly, the producers had assured the Maharaja and the SJTA of making suggested changes which shall be in line with the well-established religious belief, tradition and culture.
However, it was alleged by the petitioners that the producer has scheduled the release on July 17, without making necessary/substantial changes. Thus, they urged the Court to revoke the certificate granted to the movie by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
Chief Justice Tandon referred to the principles governing censorship by prior restraint as have been culled out by the Supreme Court in its landmark judgment S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram (1989), which was concerned with the censorship of a Tamil movie named 'Ore Oru Gramathile'. Citing the case, the Chief Justice asked the petitioners to pinpoint the objectionable portions of the film as how they deviate from the well-known Jagannath cultures.
Senior Advocate Manoj Kumar Mishra, appearing for the petitioners highlighted that the film seeks to portray a distorted version of childhood of Lord Jagannath involving fictional adventures, which are not supported by the religious history depicted by the 'Skanda Purana' (ସ୍କନ୍ଦ ପୁରାଣ) and the 'Brahma Purana' (ବ୍ରହ୍ମ ପୁରାଣ). They submitted that the animated screenplay has potential to tarnish the rich Jagannath tradition and may also attract large scale commotion amongst the devotees.
The producer, on the other hand, attempted to defend its move by arguing that it intends to put a disclaimer clarifying the movie to be fictional in nature, which has no nexus with the reality. Further, it sought protection of right to expression, as protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, through the medium of displaying movie. It also questioned the motive of the petitioners in rushing to the Court just before the scheduled date of release, even though CBFC had cleared it months ago.
Appearing for the producer, Senior Advocate Gautam Mukherjee sought permission to exhibit the film for viewing of the Bench and urged the Court to decide its objectionability after watching the same. He vehemently submitted that in absence of objections at the stage of certification, no further plea for revocation of certificate be entertained at this fag end. He also stressed on the financial predicament that may ensue in case of a stay.
He further informed the Court that opposed to what the petitioners tried to project, the film does not expressly portray the childhood of Lord Jagannath. He also underlined that the Jagannath culture is not limited merely to scriptures and Puranas but it also finds substance from folklores, like that of Bhakta Salabega and Dasia Bauri.
Prasanna Kumar Parhi, Deputy Solicitor General of India, representing the Union Government, particularly referred to Section 5-E of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, which deals with suspension and revocation of certificate granted by the CBFC. He requested the Court to put an interim stay on the movie keeping in view the upcoming Rath Yatra, upon the conclusion of which a fresh decision can be taken.
Considering the rival submissions, the Court held that the rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) have to be balanced with the reasonable restrictions enumerated under Article 19(2). It was of the view that depiction in a movie has a huge impact on the thoughts and actions of the common people.
“The moment it is expressed in the form of a movie, it has to be judged on the point of an overall impact on the public. Though they are primarily aiming for an amusement, but at times they create a massive impact in the minds of the viewers and/or the public, more particularly when it is intricately related to a religious belief and/or endowment as a devotee to the feet of God.”
The Court was particularly skeptical about the timing of the release, i.e. the day following the world-famous Rath Yatra. It thus observed–
“The opposite party no.6 [the producer] intended to release the said movie without bringing any change as suggested while screening the said film in presence of Gajapati Maharaja and the members of the Shree Jagannath Temple Administration when Rath Yatra (Car/Chariot Festival) is commencing from 16th July, 2026 where there will be a large conglomeration of the devotees at the spot and, therefore, we feel that screening of the said film on 17th July, 2026 shall be counterproductive.”
Accordingly, the Court ordered the producer – Ele Animations Pvt. Ltd. to halt the release on July 17. It was also ordered to refrain from releasing the film till the next date of hearing (August 5) or without express permission of the Court, whichever is earlier.
Case Title: Mahesh Kumar Sahu & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors.
Case No: W.P.(C) No. 21986 of 2026
Date of Order: July 15, 2026
Counsel for the Petitioners: Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Sambit Kumar Patri, Advocate
Counsel for the Opposite Parties: Mr. Debasish Tripathy, Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State & Principal Secy., Department of Law; Mr. Prasanna Kumar Parhi, Deputy Solicitor General of India along with Mr. Asutosh Mohanty, Central Government Counsel for the Union; Mr. Gautam Mukherjee, Senior Advocate along with Mr. Sidhant Dwibedi and Mr. Supratik Acharya, Advocates for the Ele Animations Pvt. Ltd.