New Delhi: Paving the way for the release of the movie ‘Kerala Story 2- Goes Beyond’, the Kerala High Court set aside a single judge’s order which stayed its release for 15 days.
In a special hearing conducted late Thursday evening, a two-judge bench of Justices Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and P.V. Balakrishnan allowed the plea filed by the film’s producer Vipul Amrutlal Shah, who has directed several films in the early 2000s like ‘Namastey London’, ‘London Dreams’, and ‘Aankhein’.
The expression of an idea by anyone through the medium of cinema, which is a public medium has its own status under the Constitution and the Cinematograph Act, 1952, the court ruled
“There is a Censor Board under the Act which allows grant of certificate for screening of the movies. As we scan the language of the Act and the guidelines framed thereunder, it prohibits use and presentation of visuals or words contemptuous of racial, religious or other groups,” it said.
Be that as it may, the court added that once the certificate was issued, there is prima facie presumption that the authority concerned has taken into account all the guidelines including public order.
Citing the Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling in Atul Mishra vs Union of India, the court held that once an expert body has considered the impact of the film on the public and has given clearance, it is no excuse to say that there may be a law and order situation due to screening of the movie.
Senior advocate Elvin Peter, who represented the filmmakers, told ThePrint that “Yesterday, a bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas passed the order at about 3:30 pm in the afternoon, staying the release of the film.”
As soon as the release was stayed, the filmmakers filed an appeal, requesting the Kerala HC Chief Justice to constitute a special bench for hearing the matter. “The special bench was then constituted at around 7:30 pm last evening. I, along with senior advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul, argued for the filmmakers. He said that courts cannot put a stop to the artist’s freedom of expression, which is protected under Article 19(1)(a), while I contested the maintainability of the plea in the first place,” Peter told ThePrint.
According to the roster, which is fixed by the Chief Justice, the case should have gone before the division bench, the senior advocate said, adding that the apex court has time and again reiterated that once a CBFC (Central Board of Film Certification) certificate is granted there is a presumption that the release of the film is legal and valid.
“In such cases, the absolute right to exhibit the movie in the hall cannot be tinkered with,” he said, adding that such a direction was passed in the challenge to the release of the 2018 Sanjay Leela Bhansali film ‘Padmaavat’.
“Once a certificate clearing the way for the film’s release has been issued by the CBFC, it is the duty of the state government to ensure that law and order is maintained.”
The CBFC had also imposed a condition that the filmmakers should introduce 16 cuts in the film, and reshoot significant portions of the same, Peter said, adding that only after complying with these directions, it was given the green light for its release.
The case will be taken up again after two weeks.
Also Read: The Kerala Story 2 faces ‘no beef with anyone’ jibe. State chooses irony over outrage
‘Duty of the state’
The division bench had acted on the film producer’s challenge to an order passed 26 February, which had stayed the film’s release for 15 days.
On Thursday, Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas had noted that prima facie, or on the face of it, the film had the potential to “distort public perception” and “disturb communal harmony”, after verifying the film’s content.
Apart from this, Justice Thomas found that there were prima facie materials which indicated “the absence of application of mind to the requirement of law” by the CBFC.
In doing so, the court had also pointed out that there was a possibility of communal disharmony or denigration of a particular community involved in the movie. The plot revolves around the alleged recruitment of Muslim women in Kerala into the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
However, setting aside the 26 February order, the division bench’s Friday order said that the contents of the teaser did not form part of the actual film, and the petitioners who were challenging its release, had not actually seen the movie in full. Instead, they were relying on the film’s teaser to substantiate their contentions, the court noted.
“It is not disputed that the CBFC has issued the certification after watching the movie in full. It is an admitted fact that both the writ petitioners have not seen the movie in full and are relying on the teaser released to substantiate their contentions in the writ petition,” the court ruled.
Relying on the apex court’s 2018 ruling in Viacom 18 Media Private Limited vs. Union of India, where the court had dealt with the question of whether the exhibition of a movie could be stayed or not, the division bench ruled, “The creative content is an insegregable aspect of Article 19(1) of the Constitution.”
“Once the parliamentary legislation confers the responsibility and the power on a statutory Board and the Board grants certification, nonexhibition of the film by the States would be contrary to the statutory provisions and infringe the fundamental right of the petitioners,” the court noted, adding that it is the duty of the government to maintain law and order in the state in such cases.
Simply put, the court said that once the CBFC has issued its certificate giving clearance for the film’s release, there is a presumption that the authorities have taken into account all guidelines, including public order. However, if the movie’s release causes any public order issue, “it is the duty of the state to maintain it,” the bench said, lifting the stay on the film’s release.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: Does The Kerala Story 2 show God’s Own Country as centre of terrorism? Pinarayi Vijayan says so