- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Kerala High Court
- /
- Kerala High Court Asks CBFC To...
Kerala High Court Asks CBFC To Reconsider Haal Movie Certification Issue, Filmmakers Decide To Delete Beef Biryani Scene, Few Dialogues
K. Salma Jennath
14 Nov 2025 3:29 PM IST
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 14) asked the makers of Shane Nigam starrer 'Haal' to re-approach the Central Board of Film Certification.Justice V.G. Arun allowed the plea and quashed the CBFC's decision. The Court observed:"In the case at hand it is clear that, instead of judging the film as would be done by an ordinary prudent person, the Board's focus was on whether the film...
The Kerala High Court on Friday (November 14) asked the makers of Shane Nigam starrer 'Haal' to re-approach the Central Board of Film Certification.
Justice V.G. Arun allowed the plea and quashed the CBFC's decision. The Court observed:
"In the case at hand it is clear that, instead of judging the film as would be done by an ordinary prudent person, the Board's focus was on whether the film will ruffle a few oversensitive feathers. Even accepting the contention of the learned ASGI that the Censor Board is involved in the act of balancing the freedom of the movie maker with the reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2), such balancing act cannot be carried out by overlooking the foundational principles of secularism and fraternity which are the bedrock of our great democracy...Upon viewing the film from the perspective of an ordinary person, this Court found the theme of the film to be in tune with the foundational principles enunciated in our Constitution."
The Court also recorded the petitioners' undertaking that they would carry out excisions 5 & 6 suggested by the Board.
"This Court is not venturing to decide on the correctness of the last two excisions in Ext.P6, since the petitioners have decided to delete those scenes on their own," was the Court's observation.
Excision 5 relates to removal of certain scenes and dialogue relating to court proceedings.
Excision 6 suggests deletion of the scene in which beef biriyani is being consumed and as well dialogues "demeaning" a cultural organisation. The Board had also asked for the blurring of rakhi in all the scenes where it is depicted.
Further, Court has directed the CBFC to take a decision on the fate of the film, within 2 weeks after the makers approach it afresh.
The film was initially planned for release on September 12.
The makers however challenged the 'A' certification given to the movie and contested the CBFC's excisions which then included a beef biriyani eating scene, a dance sequence where the heroine is wearing a burqa, police interrogation scene, blurring the name of Holy Angels College of Nursing, etc.
The Board had also asked the petitioners to show the permits obtained to film the Tamarasseri Bishop house and produce documents related to the courtroom procedure in addition to multiple other cuts.
While the plea was pending consideration before the Court, the Catholic Congress got itself impleaded. Subsequently, the Court along with the respondents and their counsels had viewed the movie, following which the Catholic Congress objected to various other scenes, in addition to the excisions suggested by the CBFC.
The Catholic Congress had argued that the movie was portraying the Bishop of Thamarassery as a supporter of inter-faith marriages, when his known public stance is otherwise. It also objected to the filming of the Bishop house from outside. They further contended that the movie was a propaganda movie, meant to downplay the serious issue of 'Love Jihad'. This argument was raised by the CBFC as well.
Later, an office bearer of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) also impleaded himself and filed a statement opposing the movie. According to him, the RSS, a cultural organization is portrayed as 'thuggish, aggressive and riotous'.
Case No: WP(C) No. 37251/2025
Case Title: Juby Thomas and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 738
Counsel for the petitioners: Joseph Kodianthara (Sr.), E.S. Saneeh, John Vithayathil
Counsel for the respondents: AR.L. Sundaresan (ASG), Rajagopalan A. – CBFC, Mariya Rajan, S. Suja, Ann Mariya John, Felix Samson Varghese – Catholic Congress, P. Sreekumar (Sr.), S. Anil Kumar (Cherthala) - RSS office bearer
Click to Read/Download Judgment