Kerala High Court Reserves Order On 'Kerala Story 2' Movie Producer's Appeal Against Single Bench's Stay On Release

The Kerala High Court on Thursday heard appeals preferred by the producer of the movie 'Kerala Story 2: Goes Beyond' against the interim order of the Single Judge granting stay on the release of the movie, slated to hit the theatres tomorrow.The Division Bench of Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice P.V. Balakrishnan heard the appeals urgently today, at 7:30 p.m., just hours after the Single Bench pronounced the order.The appeal was moved by the movie's producer Vipul Amrutlal Shah.Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul appeared for the appellant and assailed the interim order on multiple grounds.At the outset, Senior Counsel submitted that the writ petition challenging the film was filed 16 days after the teaser was released, and that even the Single Judge described the matter as being moved at the “eleventh hour.”He pointed out that when the first film in the franchise was released, no stay had been granted. The earlier movie, he submitted, went on to receive a National Award. Now, with the sequel, the storyline is no longer confined to Kerala but extends to other States as well, including Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.“Are We So Frail That A Movie Would Shake Religious Tenets?”Challenging the continuation of the interim order, Senior Counsel argued that the revision petition ought to be considered expeditiously and that the interim stay should not operate in the meantime.“Are we so frail that a movie would scandalise or shake the faiths and tenets of a religion?” he submitted, contending that the storyline of a film is the prerogative of the storyteller.He emphasised that the film does not denigrate the State of Kerala in any manner. “It is a State that everyone loves,” he said, adding that the movie addresses what the filmmakers perceive as a social evil—an issue on which there may be differences of opinion.“Courts Have Not Interfered In Films On Other Religions”Senior Counsel further argued that in several instances where films depicted or even made fun of Hindu gods, Hindu godmen, or Catholic priests, courts had not intervened.“If every other religion had been subjected to satire or critical portrayal and the Court had not interfered, this case also should not be interfered with,” he submitted.He stressed that the protagonists in the film are shown as fighting back against the system and that there is no denigration of any religion. “It is a proud religion, a great religion. There is no denigration,” he argued.“Commercial Disruption Will Destroy Creative Work”Highlighting the commercial ramifications of the stay, the Senior Counsel submitted that the film was slated for release in 1,500 theatres the following day. Due to the interim order, the release had been halted not only domestically but also overseas.“I have given it to distributors. This disruption is not merely for a week or two. It finally finishes a person who is coming out with a creative work of art,” he contended.Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul submitted that the film deals with a “social evil,” adding that the Supreme Court and various High Courts have, in several decisions, recognised the existence of such societal concerns. At this stage, the Bench sought clarification on the specific reliefs sought in the writ petition. On being asked about the prayers, counsel read out portions of one of the pleas, which sought modification of the film's title to a neutral name, removal of all direct references portraying the State as indulging in romantic or forceful conversions, and deletion of the tagline “inspired by true events” to be replaced with a disclaimer stating that the film is purely fictional and unsupported by government data.Responding to the nature of these prayers, Senior Counsel submitted that even the first instalment of the franchise had “Kerala” in its title. Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari queried whether the earlier film was titled Kerala Story and whether the present film was its sequel. Counsel clarified that while the first movie centred on a protagonist from Kerala, the sequel expands beyond the State, with protagonists from Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh. He argued that it is untenable to suggest that such a film denigrates a “great State like Kerala.”The Bench then asked what, according to the appellants, was derogatory in the film and noted that the learned Single Judge had earlier asked to view the movie, which the appellants had declined. In response, Senior Counsel submitted that at the relevant time they were pressing arguments on maintainability and locus standi. He maintained that there was nothing in the film to show that the State of Kerala was denigratedThe Bench further questioned the maintainability of the writ petition. Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari asked, “Who is this petitioner? What is the locus standi?” In response, counsel for the appellant submitted that the petitioner is a Keralite. The Court then queried whether the matter was in the nature of a public interest litigation and...

Kerala High Court Reserves Order On 'Kerala Story 2' Movie Producer's Appeal Against Single Bench's Stay On Release

K. Salma Jennath

Tags