Kerala: The Kerala High Court on Thursday (February 26) stayed the release of the film Kerala Story 2: Goes Beyond. The court passed this interim order following petitions challenging the censor certification. The film was scheduled to be released in theaters yesterday.
CBFC Directed to Re-Examine the Film
Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas also directed the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to re-examine the case. This order was given during the hearing of interim applications filed by the petitioners. A detailed order in the case is yet to be issued.
Court’s Oral Observation on the Film’s Content
Earlier, the court had expressed its desire to view the film before deciding the case, but the producers did not agree. Their lawyer argued that the case could be debated only on its merits.
During the hearing, the High Court’s oral observation said, “Kerala lives in complete harmony. But you have shown that all this is happening throughout Kerala. This sends a wrong signal and could incite public sentiment.”
Petitioners’ Objections and Arguments
The court then heard detailed arguments from the petitioners’ lawyers, the senior advocate representing the producer, and the CBFC’s lawyer, and reserved its decision.
The petitioners argued that the film was granted certification without following the statutory procedures prescribed under the Cinematograph Act. They stated that the film’s title and plot—which depict themes such as forced conversions and terrorism—would defame the entire state of Kerala and could incite communal tension.
Claim of Alleged Deterioration of the Atmosphere Following ‘The Kerala Story’
During the hearing, one petitioner stated that after the release of the prequel film, ‘The Kerala Story,’ there had been incidents of negative sentiment and resentment against Kerala and Keralites both within the country and abroad.
The petitioners also stated that during promotions, the filmmakers had stated that the film was not about Kerala but a pan-India story. Even the alleged victims depicted were not from Kerala. Consequently, they objected to the use of the word ‘Kerala’ in the film’s title.
Arguments by the Producers and the Court’s Observations
The senior lawyer representing the producers questioned the maintainability of the petitions, arguing that they amounted to public interest litigation and that the petitioners had not shown any personal harm, but were instead seeking to protect the collective reputation of Kerala.
The petitioners responded that despite the complaints being of a similar nature, their complaints could not be ignored.
One petition also presented a transcript of the teaser uploaded on YouTube, which the court found objectionable. However, the CBFC lawyer argued that since the teaser and trailer had not been certified by the Board, the Board was not responsible for the content on social media. It was also argued that the content shown in the teaser was not in the film.
The court also noted that the petitions did not make any specific request against the teaser or trailer, and that other legal remedies were available against objectionable content on social media. The Court also orally observed that since the producer has refused to screen the film, it cannot be said with certainty what exactly is shown in the film.